High. Learn. Res. Commun. Volume 5, Num. 3 | September 2015
P. Ryan
three versions of the criteria: (1) business/nonprofit, (2) education, (3) health care organizations.
Baldrige aims to strengthen U.S. competitiveness and serve as a model for national excellence
and award programs around the world (Asif et al., 2012; Baldrige 2014a; Baldrige, 2014b). The
Baldrige education criteria for performance excellence are a powerful mechanism to assess
performance excellence, but the criteria lack a theoretical foundation (Asif et al., 2012, p. 3109).
Furthermore, the Baldrige criteria for performance excellence are too vague and do not address
the requirements from an academic standpoint (Asif et al., 2012, p. 3110).
The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA), in collaboration with the
higher education sector, developed and maintains the UK Quality Code for Higher Education to
assure quality standards for higher education institutions in the United Kingdom (QAA, 2014).
Quality Matters (QM) is a leader in quality assurance for online education and has received
national recognition for its peer-based approach and continuous improvement in online education
and student learning. QM subscribers include community and technical colleges, colleges and
universities, K–12 schools and systems, and other academic institutions (Varonism, 2014).
Quality Matters is also a leading provider of tools and processes used to evaluate quality
in course design (Quality Matters, 2014a). The Quality Matters Rubric is a widely used set of
standards for the design of online and blended courses at the college level (Quality Matters, 2014;
Varonism, 2014). More than 700 colleges and universities subscribe to the nonprofit QM program
(Quality Matters, 2014a). The QM process for continuous improvement is the framework for
quality assurance efforts in online learning and provides effective professional development for
faculty making the transition into distance education. The Quality Matters Rubric is a set of eight
general standards and 41 specific standards used to evaluate the design of online and blended
courses. The QM Rubric is complete with annotations that explain the application of the standards
and the relationships among them. A scoring system and set of online tools facilitate the
evaluation by a team of peer reviewers (Pollacia & Terrie, 2009; Quality Matters, 2014b;
Varonism, 2014). As online programs proliferate in international higher education, many
constituents have concerns about quality. Quality assurance is becoming more significant. While
the QM program offers a systematic quality assurance process for the design of online programs,
it lacks criteria to determine the quality of delivery and instructor and faculty engagement.
Therefore, QM is not a total solution (Pollacia & Terrie, 2009; Quality Matters, 2014b).
Aside from the differences in types of services and quality frameworks developed and
used by different agencies, another difficulty identified in the literature is a lack of cultural
sensitivity (Gift, Leo-Rhynie, & Moniquette, 2006; Hodson & Thomas, 2010; Smith, 2010).
Furthermore, Stella and Woodhouse (2011) argued higher education institutions in developing
countries could be at a disadvantage in transnational education and the establishment of a set of
minimum standards because of their capacity “to participate effectively in the global trading
system” (p. 12).
Research on Effectiveness of QA Practices
Higher education gleaned the concept of quality from commercial settings and private
industry (Newton, 2002). Methods of quality assurance were introduced in England in the 1980s
as part of the Teaching Quality Assessment (TQA). TQA provided a third party review and
assessment at the institutional level and peer reviewers conducted the TQA review (Cheng,
2010). Then, TQA was replaced with subject reviews during the period of 1995–2001. Subject
review was replaced by the institutional audit by the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) for higher
education in England (Cheng, 2010).