MCEETYA's National Protocols for Higher Education Approval Processes: Part 4 & protocol 4

Background

4.1
In March 2000 a number of higher education institutions had established campuses in distant locations where conventional relationships based on physical proximity were not feasible. In some cases they had established companies, entered joint ventures or contracted with other organisations to assist in the delivery of programs in locations a substantial distance from their major campuses. These delivery points were variously in other countries or other States, and the organisation delivering programs may have been operating under the name of the delivery agency, or the institution offering the award.

University operating its own name

4.2
Where an Australian university or other self-accrediting institution operates in a distant location and issues an award under its own name, the Council or governing body of the university or other institution is responsible for quality assurance and will be subject to audit by the AUQA. For overseas campuses the institution will be expected to maintain standards at least equivalent to those provided in Australia regardless of any specific requirements of overseas governments.

University operating through another organisation

4.3
Where a university or other self-accrediting institution enters into an arrangement with another organisation, and the university or other self-accrediting institution is to grant the academic award, the relationship will be construed as one of principal and agent. The principal in this relationship must carry full responsibility for all aspects of delivery, including:

1. quality and standards comparable to those on other campus(es) of the institution;
2. teaching by staff qualified at a level comparable to those on other campuses of the institution;
3. resources and facilities adequate for the delivery of the course; and
4.  adequate measures to protect the welfare of students.

4.4
Measures taken by the institution to ensure standards comparable to those of other campuses will be subject to audit by the AUQA.

4.5
The Council or governing body of a university or other self-accrediting institution has primary responsibility for quality assurance under these arrangements, and the direct line of accountability for that council or governing body is to the Minister and Government of the State or Territory in which it is established. However, there must be some capacity for action in the case of seriously deficient quality standards and failure to take remedial action in relation to a campus in another jurisdiction. Consequently where the Minister in a State or Territory in which a campus is operating has serious concerns about quality of delivery whether resulting from reports of the AUQA or otherwise, the Minister may, following consultation with the Minister in the State or Territory where the institution is largely based and an independent review:

1. establish conditions for the continuation of activities within the State of Territory;
2. require that the operations of the institution within the State or Territory occur under the academic supervision of another institution; or
3. close the campus and cease providing programs in that State or Territory.

4.6
Universities and other self-accrediting institutions do not have the power to accredit the courses of other institutions. Where an institution makes curriculum and materials available to another institution, and the award issued following completion of the program will be issued in the name of another institution, the other institution will be subject to the accreditation requirements of the State or Territory in which it proposes to operate as if it was operating as an independent organisation. The institution in whose name the award will be issued will have full responsibility for the academic welfare of students who are enrolled in programs leading to the award.