Guidelines for the Development of a Quality Assurance (QA) Framework for Open, Distance and eLearning Programmes AVU Quality Assurance Framework Workshop Dr Bakary Diallo, 15 May 2014 Nairobi, Kenya

1. Click to edit Master title style
• Click to edit Master text styles
• Second level
• Third level
• Fourth level
• Fifth level
African Virtual University Page 1
Guidelines for the DevelopmentGuidelines for the Development
of aof a
Quality Assurance (QA)Quality Assurance (QA)
Framework for Open, DistanceFramework for Open, Distance
and eLearning Programmesand eLearning Programmes
AVU Quality Assurance Framework Workshop
15 May 2014
Nairobi, Kenya

2. Click to edit Master title style
• Click to edit Master text styles
• Second level
• Third level
• Fourth level
• Fifth level
African Virtual University Page 2
Workshop GoalsWorkshop Goals
1. To build consensus for the basic QA ODeL Guidelines
through open discussions, deliberation, and constructive
commentary and feedback.
2. To ensure that the Guidelines provide a set of minimum
QA parameters that are flexible and adaptive for the
Partner institutions to meet a) institutional needs and b)
accrediting and regulatory agency QA standards in each
partner nation for new and existing ODeL programs.
3. To ensure the Guidelines ‘complement’ existing QA
policies and structures at the Partner institutions consistent
with national accrediting and regulatory bodies.

3. Click to edit Master title style
• Click to edit Master text styles
• Second level
• Third level
• Fourth level
• Fifth level
African Virtual University Page 3
ObjectivesObjectives
• Discuss the draft Quality Assurance Framework developed by the AVU
and provide input for its alignment with existing QA of National
Regulatory bodies and regional QA bodies
• Make recommendations for its recognition by the National Regularity
bodies
• Make recommendations for its adoption by the AVU partner institutions
• Make recommendations for its approval by the AVU Board of Directors
• Make recommendations for the accreditation of AVU programs by
National Regulatory Bodies and Regional QA bodies

4. Click to edit Master title style
• Click to edit Master text styles
• Second level
• Third level
• Fourth level
• Fifth level
African Virtual University Page 4
Why Designate the QA Framework for ODeL as ‘Guidelines’?Why Designate the QA Framework for ODeL as ‘Guidelines’?
As an interinstitutional, multi-national partnership, these
guidelines are intended to provide maximum flexibility and
adaptability to meet local institutional needs and comply
with national regulatory agencies, accrediting
commissions, and institutional QA mechanisms already in
place at the respective institutions.
The document has been designated as a set of ‘Guidelines’
to recognize that each partner institution must have the
flexibility to adapt these to national and institutional needs
for ensuring quality in ODeL programs.

5. Click to edit Master title style
• Click to edit Master text styles
• Second level
• Third level
• Fourth level
• Fifth level
African Virtual University Page 5
Background and ContextBackground and Context
• AVU recognizes the QA authority and oversight responsibilities of the national
regulatory agencies and accrediting bodies and that these agencies are independent
from universities.
• The Guidelines, building off the Phase I Project, will be a comprehensive QA approach
rather than program by program.
• Partner institutions are critical to building consensus around the Guidelines to ensure
consistency with existing institutional QA systems and accrediting/regulatory bodies in
the respective nations.
• The Guidelines, building upon the Commonwealth of Learning QA Toolkit, are based
upon international best practices in ODeL quality assurance standards.
• The Guidelines are designed to be flexible and adaptive to the unique cultural, social,
ethnic, political, economic, and educational context of Africa and African Higher
Education.

6. Click to edit Master title style
• Click to edit Master text styles
• Second level
• Third level
• Fourth level
• Fifth level
African Virtual University Page 6
QA Framework CriteriaQA Framework Criteria
Criterion 1: Institutional Policies and Mission
Criterion 2: Program Design and Development
Criterion 3: Course Design and Development
Criterion 4: Learning Infrastructure and Resources
Criterion 5: Learner Support and Evaluation
Criterion 6: Learner Assessment and Evaluation

7. Click to edit Master title style
• Click to edit Master text styles
• Second level
• Third level
• Fourth level
• Fifth level
African Virtual University Page 7
Criterion ComponentsCriterion Components
• Criteria standards are based upon global best practices used in
HE open, distance and eLearning programs.
• Performance Indicators (PIs) – Specific indicators for
measuring performance of each criteria standard.
• Evidence – direct documents/policies that demonstrate
validation of the performance indicators
• Performance Measure is an evaluative assessment that the
criteria standard successfully or unsuccessfully meets the
standard. A marginal rating would be considered a minimum
level of competency towards meeting the criterion standard.

8. Click to edit Master title style
• Click to edit Master text styles
• Second level
• Third level
• Fourth level
• Fifth level
African Virtual University Page 8
Value-Added Benefits of the GuidelinesValue-Added Benefits of the Guidelines
• Criterions 1 and 2 integrate key standards, PIs, and evidence samples that cover both the
institution QA arena as well as individual academic programs delivered via ODeL. This
suggests a clear recognition from ODL global best practices that program and institutional
QA processes need to complement each other – not exist as separate processes. Moreover,
well developed QA Frameworks at the institutional level that align with the program QA
processes provide greater consistency and flexibility for meeting minimum standards set by
regulatory agencies and accrediting bodies.
• The Self-Assessment capacity of the Guidelines allows either a comprehensive or specific
review of a relevant criterion. For example, a program-institution may have very well
developed student support services but need considerable improvement in the quality
processes for assessing student performance in ODeL programs. Thus, focusing on a high
need area like assessment could be carried out by the institution-program.
• The flexibility and adaptability of the Guidelines provide a sound starting point in unique
partnership programs such as the AVU Multi-National Project. This allows partners to set
the baseline criterions and minimum competencies for existing and future ODeL
interinstitutional program partnerships.

9. Click to edit Master title style
• Click to edit Master text styles
• Second level
• Third level
• Fourth level
• Fifth level
African Virtual University Page 9
Key QuestionsKey Questions
• What role does AVU play in the administration,
coordination, and inventory of these guidelines
for partner institutions?
• Given the diversity and needs of partner
institutions and national QA agencies, is it
feasible (and realistic) that one set of Guidelines
can meet these needs?
• What are the critical next steps for moving
forward?

10. Click to edit Master title style
• Click to edit Master text styles
• Second level
• Third level
• Fourth level
• Fifth level
African Virtual University Page 10
Innovative Approaches to ODeL Quality AssuranceInnovative Approaches to ODeL Quality Assurance