Engaging international students. An analysis of the Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA) reports
| Published date | 06 July 2012 |
| Pages | 207-222 |
| Date | 06 July 2012 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/09684881211240286 |
| Author | Jane Burdett,Joanna Crossman |
| Subject Matter | Education |
Engaging international students
An analysis of the Australian Universities
Quality Agency (AUQA) reports
Jane Burdett and Joanna Crossman
School of Management, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia
Abstract
Purpose – Australia has enjoyed two decades of growth in international student enrolments. This
phenomenon, combined with the evolution of quality assurance policy frameworks, has stimulated
interest in the social and academic experiences of international students and their educational
outcomes. The Australian Universities Quality Agency’s (AUQA) second round of quality audits
assessed and reported on the performance of Australian universities in the area of
“internationalisation”. AUQA findings and recommendations for required action send powerful
messages to guide university priorities, practices and strategies in pursuit of quality enhancement in
relation to student engagement. This paper seeks to address these issues.
Design/methodology/approach – This study uses a thematic analysis approach to explore
“internationalisation” in 14 AUQA audit reports published between 2006 and 2010.
Findings – This paper identifies three key areas arising from AUQA audit reports that form a basis
for discussion in this paper. These areas are: the social and academic engagement of both international
and local students, and matters relating to English language standards and support. Observations
arising from AUQA university reports direct attention to examples of initiatives that appear to be
enriching the quality of the student engagement and indicate where further development may be
required.
Practical implications – In seeking strategies for enhanced student experience, AUQA supports
collaboration across universities in devising models for identifying student needs and creating
mechanisms that bring about quality student experience, engagement and language outcomes. This
analysis of the reports will likely assist those stakeholders working in universities who wish to
identify successful approaches to promote the engagement of international students and refine
existing useful and positive strategies in implementing and developing ideas in their own individual
university contexts.
Originality/value – Analysis of the substantial text of AUQA reports have been underexploited by
researchers to date. This paper is likely to be of interest to those stakeholders of international
education in universities, not only in Australia but in other national contexts where international
students are significantly represented.
Keywords Quality, Studentexperience, Engagement, Internationalization,Language, Students,
Universities,Australia
Paper type Research paper
Introduction: AUQA and internationalisation
The quest for quality in Australian universities began to gain greater attention in the
1980s as government funding became linked to quality assessments and performance
indicators reflected industrial reforms aimed at improving efficiency and effectiveness
(Department of Education Science and Training, DEST, 2000). A number of initiatives
illustrate the focus on quality in universities including: Higher Education: Quality and
Diversity; Australian Qualifications Framework; National Protocols for Higher
Education Approval Process, through to establishment of the AUQA in 2000 (AUQA,
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0968-4883.htm
Engaging
international
students
207
Quality Assurance in Education
Vol. 20 No. 3, 2012
pp. 207-222
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0968-4883
DOI 10.1108/09684881211240286
2008; Shah et al., 2011) and more recently, The Bradley (2008) Review of Australian
Higher Education and the establishment of the Tertiary Education Quality and
Standards Agency (TEQSA) (superseding AUQA). AUQA had been established by the
Ministerial Council on Education, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA) in March
2000 to provide clear directions for universities in relation to standards, and to assume
an accreditation and auditing role (Cram, 2010, pp. 1-3) that would drive policy
development.
Quality improvement rhetoric both in industry and education has been fuelled by an
agenda of reform, greater university self-regulation, university reputation buildi ng and
accountability in public spending (Burdett and Crossman, 2010; Shah et al., 2011;
Wimshurst et al., 2006; DEST, 2004; Evans, 2007; Tripathi and Jeevan, 2009).
Prior to 2011, each university compiled self-assessed performance portfolios that
included its own goals that complied with external, national and interna tional
standards identified by the National Protocols for Higher Education Approval Process
and these portfolios were later used as a basis for analysis and review by AUQA.
Campus visits by audit committees provided further information and evidence to
verify and supplement portfolios (AUQA, 2010; de la Harpe and Radloff, 2006; Stella
and Woodhouse, 2007). Thus, the AUQA approach was one that encouraged reflection,
the identification of areas for self-development and strategies for meeting quality
improvement goals (de la Harpe and Radloff, 2006, p. 1). AUQA’s auditing role
provided feedback about the progress of each university in meeting self-identified
goals (Baird, 2007). AUQA reports are framed in terms of commendations for effective
practice, affirmations supporting practices identified by individual universities and
recommendations that may or may not require urgent attention (Baird, 2007; AUQA,
2008).
The first of the two audit cycles (2005-2007) involved 38 universities and considered
a full range of institutional activities (Baird, 2007). In the second cycle from 2008
onwards, AUQA focused on standards, outcomes and benchmarking in relation to
goals in two areas selected by the universities themselves (Stella and Woodhouse,
2007). Of particular interest was how feedback from Cycle 1 had been addressed
specifically within the areas or themes selected by the universities. Themes were
identified by universities a year prior to AUQA campus visits and represented those
areas perceived to present the greatest potential risk (AUQA, 2010) to the university.
The theme selected by AUQA for attention in Cycle 2 was “international activities”
encompassing internationalisation (AUQA, 2010).
Underpinning concepts
Quality in higher education and the student experience
Quality assurance policies and mechanisms are evident in the literature relating to
higher education around the world (Shah et al., 2011, p. 477). In the past, quality
discussions in education have been concerned with measures of student standards of
achievement using course grades as indicators of quality (Anderson et al., 2000). Now,
“quality” in undergraduate education encompasses the whole student experience.
However, “quality” remains a contested concept (Anderson, 2006; Rue
´et al., 2010;
Vidovich, 2002;) and academics do not embrace all aspects of quality assurance
processes (Anderson, 2006; Cheng, 2011; Lim, 2008; Poole, 2010). Understanding and
measuring the student experience has taken centre stage in quality interests for
QAE
20,3
208
To continue reading
Request your trial