eLearning > Quality Regulation

Bibliography

The following section provides an overview of the key publications and related websites in relation to QA issues which readers might wish to familiarise themselves.

Resources are themed under four headings:

  1. International bodies and national groups concerned with QA
  2. Other publications in relation to QA in the cross-national context
  3. QA with specific reference to online learning programmes
  4. QA in China

All URLs listed were retrievable on 15 April 2006.

 

1.0       QA in the international context

Several major organisations embrace concerns for Quality in educational systems internationally.

i. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, OECD

The work of the OECD (www.oecd.org) provides comprehensive coverage of national educational systems.  In addition to country profiles, it has a number of recent publications which usefully address the issues of quality education provision in the international context.  The following reports consider the opportunities and barriers with particular implications arising from trade issues in educational services around the globe.

OECD (2003), OECD Review of Financing and Quality Assurance Reforms in Higher Education in The People’s Republic of China, CCNM/EDU, Accessed online 15-05-06 at www.oecd.org/dataoecd/40/33/17137038.pdf
(Comprehensive overview of the current Chinese higher education system reforms, and three future policy alternatives in relation to quality management, financing and efficiency measures).

OECD (2005) Guidelines for Quality Provision in Cross-border Higher Education (OECD, Paris)
(Short overview of guidelines for quality assurance and accreditation bodies internationally).

OECD (2004) Quality and Recognition in Higher Education: The Cross-border Challenge

OECD (2004) Internationalisation and Trade in Higher Education: Opportunities and Challenges

OECD (2000) Current Issues in Chinese Higher Education (OECD, Paris)

Brennan, J., Hollow, J., and Shah, T. (2001) Institutional Experiences of Quality Assessment in Higher Education, Open University, the United Kingdom. OECD publication  www.oecd.org/dataoecd/49/23/1871706.pdf

 

ii. United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organisation UNESCO www.unesco.org

The UNESCO Higher Education Portal http://portal.unesco.org/education/en/ev.php-URL_ID=21773&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html offers support to decision-makers and practitioners with access to information and tools that will assist in policy planning and development of online distance learning.  The following publications are available via the portal.

The UNESCO Global Forum of Quality Assurance, Accreditation and the Recognition of Qualifications www.unesco.org/education/higher_education/global_forum/main
To provide dialogue between international frameworks for Quality and Mobility.

UNESCO Guidelines for Quality Provision in Cross-border Higher Education (Paris, Dec. 2005) Also available from www.chea.org/pdf/UNESCO_Guidelines.pdf

UNESCO guidelines on responsible partnerships between cross-border higher education, business and society (Paris, 2003).
(Includes a section on useful information tools for online and distance education)

UNESCO Quality Assurance. Asia Pacific Regional Bureau for Education. Retrieved from http://www.unescobkk.org/index.php?id=12
(Highlights national policy-level concerns for ensuring standards and innovation in educational systems).

UNESCO (2003) The Virtual Universities: models and messages.  Lessons from Case Studies edited by Susan D’Antoni www.unesco.org/iiep/virtualuniversity/home.php
Containing Mason, R., (2003) A world of borderless higher education – impact and implications
(Offers a useful summary of key policy themes being addressed cross-nationally.  It also runs a number of active forums highlighting key developments in areas such as Open content initiatives).

UNESCO (2002) The Developing World of Borderless Higher Education: Markets, providers, Quality Assurance and Qualifications. Report by R. Middlehurst (Paris, 2002). http://portal.unesco.org/education/fr/file_download.php/758a640054fb5126b4e0863d2f456460gf6_middlehurst_document.doc
(Considers the role and impact of new entrants to the education markets, in particular corporate universities, private and for-profit providers, media and publishing business interests, and new forms of educational broker).

Along with the Commonwealth of Learning - an intergovernmental organisation www.col.org/ - UNESCO supports the Global Distance Education Network (GDENet www.gdenet.org/). This website offers practical guidance to those involved in distance education.  The resource area offers a searchable database of reports of good practice, selected papers, information tools and useful handbooks for practitioners in open and distance learning (ODL).


iii. The International Commission of the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA)

CHEA (www.chea.org/) is also active in this field.  CHEA is a non-profit national organisation that co-ordinates accreditation activity in the US.  Its website provides various resources including a checklist of suggested good practice in quality higher education across borders developed by CHEA, the American Council on Education, the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada and the International Association of Universities.  It also commissions reports, including:

Middlehurst R. and Woodfield S. (2005). International Quality Review and Distance Learning: Lessons from Five Countries. Occasional Paper, January 2005. Washington: CHEA, pp 80.


iv. Observatory for Borderless Higher Education, UK

The membership-based UK Observatory (www.obhe.ac.uk) provides comprehensive coverage of quality issues and regularly commissions expert reports on the issues and challenges of QA, specifically in the trans-national settings e.g. where a provider might wish to develop programmes in another host country. 

Anderson, S., Currie, K., Smith, M. (2004) Quicker, Better, Cheaper: Information strategies and asset-based learning materials development. Observatory on Borderless Higher Education [UK]. London, 2004. pp 25. (Report. 27).
(Argues that the production of materials should be considered a much more prominent and integral element of quality assurance schemes given that most current managed learning environments concentrate upon administration and the learner management system).

Larsen, K. and Vincent-Lancrin, S. (2004) Cross-border Higher Education: An analysis of current trends, policy strategies and future scenarios, London, OBHE, November 2004, pp 21.
(Considers the growth of cross-border education over the last two decades and policy responses to this demand. It identifies 3 possible scenarios for future development).

Middlehurst R. and Campbell C. (2003) Quality Assurance and Borderless Higher Education: Finding Pathways through the Maze. In Bjarnason S. (ed.)  Mapping Borderless Higher Education: Policy, Markets and Competition. London: OBHE, pp.89-103.
(A most useful paper outlining core issues and setting the key questions which have to be addressed at both policy and institutional levels).

Twigg, C. (2002) Improving Quality and Reducing Costs: Designs for effective learning using information technology, London, OBHE September, 2002.
(Argues for new approaches to online programme development in order to meet educational goals for costs of delivery while meeting aspirations to improve access and quality to educational opportunities).

OBHE (2004) Higher Education in China, Part 2: Scale of foreign activity and examples London, OBHE Briefing Note No.13, September 2004
OBHE (2004) Higher Education in China, Part 1: Context and regulation for foreign activity London, OBHE, Briefing Note No.12, July 2004
(Offers a useful overview of modern distance education opportunities in China from the perspective of transnational providers, as opposed to Chinese domestic developments).

OBHE (2003). Quality Assurance in Borderless Higher Education: Six initiatives London, OBHE, Briefing Note No.11, May 2003
(Summarises 6 approaches to quality assurance schemes and their likely successes in supporting quality innovation when entering new markets).


v. National Quality Assurance Agencies

The work of the UK QAA is well-represented at its website www.qaa.ac.uk which has recently published Code of Practice for Assurance of Academic Quality and Standards in Higher Education which comprises a suite of 10 reports which addresses system-wide principles for matters relating to the management of higher education, incorporating emerging lessons from collaborative provision cross-nationally.

QAA, Code of Practice, Section 2: collaborative provision and flexible and distributed learning (including eLearning) September 2004.
www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/codeOfPractice/section2 


vi. Other bodies

The International Network for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (INQAAHE) collects and disseminates information on current and developing practices. www.inqaahe.nl
The peer-reviewed journal, Quality in Higher Education is published in association with
INQAAHE, by Taylor and Francis.  http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/titles/13538322.asp
INQAAHE also produces useful digests and reports in its internal bi-annual “QA” publication.

The Asia-Pacific Quality Network (www.apqn.org/) is a membership organisation but its website provides links to conference and related information in the Asia-Pacific area. It was established in January 2003 (INQAAHE, QA, Issue 25, November 2004) bridging 40 countries.  It commissioned the following report from the Director of the Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA):

Stella, A. Understanding Quality Assurance Frameworks in the Asia-Pacific Region: Indicators of Quality (Australian Universities Quality Agency, AUQA) www.auqa.edu.au, Internal report) www.apqn.org/files/virtual_library/project_reports/apqn_project-dec2005.pdf, pp.12.
(Seeks to provide an introduction to the definitions surrounding quality indicators, standards, benchmarks, criteria etc.)

The European Association for Quality Assurance (ENQA) shares information and new developments among the EU member community.  Its website provides access to various reports including self-analysis documents used by QA agencies in examining the opportunity for quality convergence (and harmonisation) of standards across Europe
www.enqa.net

Middlehurst R. (2001) Quality Assurance Implications of New Forms of Higher Education: Part 1: ‘A typology’, ENQA Occasional Papers 3, Helsinki, European Network for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (September 2001).
(Useful summary of key quality issues typically involved in various forms of new curricula, content, and qualifications)

Along with the Commonwealth of Learning - an intergovernmental organisation www.col.org/ - UNESCO supports the Global Distance Education Network (GDENet www.gdenet.org/). This website offers practical guidance to those involved in distance education.  The resource area offers a searchable database of reports of good practice, selected papers, information tools and useful handbooks for practitioners in open and distance learning (ODL).

Tait, A. (Ed) Perspectives on Distance Education: Quality Assurance in Higher Education: Selected Case Studies (Commonwealth of Learning, Vancouver, 1997)
www.col.org/10th/about/images/QA.doc
(A range of case studies from Germany, Norway, Israel, India, the United Kingdom, Hong Kong, and Canada highlighting changing orientation from quality control to quality assurance within national and institutional contexts).

 

2.0       Other publications in relation to QA

Eaton, J. (2003). The International role of US-Recognised accrediting organisations, International Higher Education, Spring (Boston: Boston College)

Hope, A., Quality Assurance (2001) in G. Farrell (ed.)  The Development of Virtual Education: A Global Perspective Commonwealth of Learning, Vancouver, Canada, (2001), pp 125-140 www.col.org/virtualed/virtual2pdfs/V2_chapter7.pdf
(Reviews institutional responses to the demands of respective national quality assurance agencies and other market issues for developing online education provision).

Larsen, K. and Vincent-Lancrin, S. (2002) International Trade in Educational Services; Good or Bad Higher Education and Management Policy, 14 (3) Dec. 2002, pp.9-45.
(Larsen and Vincent-Lancrin are staff at the OECD Centre for Educational Research and Innovation, CERI).

McGhee, P. (2003). The Academic Quality Handbook: Enhancing Higher Education in Universities and Further Education Colleges London Kogan Page
(Examines the impact of the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) upon academic review procedures for programmes and courses in the UK.  Provides practical support to academic and development teams through its inclusion of decision-making flowcharts, self-assessment questionnaires and examples of best practice).

The National Unions of Students in Europe (ESIB) European Student Handbook on Quality Assurance in Higher Education
www.aic.lv/ace/ace_disk/Bologna/contrib/ESIB/QAhandbook.pdf
(Provides useful background information on the role and purpose of quality from the student perspective, and provides questions for student representatives to ask of their institutions).

Smith, J. & Whelan, K. (2005). Change agents or partners in conversation: Academic Developers appropriating institutional quality agendas to foster critical curriculum debate Proceedings of the Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australia HERDSA 2005 conference, July 2005, 525-532.
(Showcases the tensions and resolutions achieved between academic and academic developer perspectives as part of a curriculum development programme)

Loud. M.M.L. (2004). Setting Standards and Providing Guidelines: The Means toward What End?Evaluation, Apr 2004; 10: 237 - 245.

Additional resources
Key research centres in the UK addressing these issues, include Centre for Policy and Change in Tertiary Education, University of Surrey, http://www.surrey.ac.uk/cpc-te/

 

3.0       QA with specific reference to online learning programmes

While the other sections may reference online learning developments within the wider remit of education, this section highlights those resources which might be called upon for reference to online distance education issues only.

Appleton, A. & Veness, D. (2005). Flexmasters: Behind the quality in materials development. Forum of The Open and Distance Learning Association of Australia ODLAA 2005 Nov. 2005 www.odlaa.org/events/2005conf/ref/ODLAA2005Applebee-Veness.pdf#search='McNaught%20Quality%20assurance%20for%20online%20courses '
(Charts the changes in institutional quality assurance policies and processes in the wake of the development of new flexible, online learning courses).

Broad, M. C. (1999). The dynamics of quality assurance in online distance education. Electronic Journal of Instructional Science and Technology, 3, 12-21.
(Reflections on the role of quality assurance in supporting the internal and external opinion of programmes).

Bower, B. (2001). Distance Education: Facing the Faculty Challenge. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 4:2, pp8.. www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/summer42/bower42.html
(Considers issues of staff motivation to develop online programmes and identifies concerns with quality of education).

Calvert, J. (2003). Quality assurance and quality development.  What will make the difference?  In G. Davies and E. Stacey (Eds.) Quality education @ a distance. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 17-28.
(Addresses the tensions for universities involved in both campus-based and online educational operations.  It argues for more focus on a concept of quality development as a complementary process to QA processes to encourage innovation)

Davey, B. and Tatnall, A. (2003). Improving distance education through programme quality assurance. In G. Davies and E. Stacey (Eds.) Quality education @ a distance. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 238-248.
(Case study of an Australian institution’s attempt to introduce a programme quality assurance scheme highlighting academic responses to the change management process).

eLearning Consortium (2002). Making Sense of Learning Specifications & Standards: A Decision Maker’s Guide to their Adoption Industry View. MASIE Centre www.masie.com  

Epps, J. and Stacey, E. (2003). Establishing quality online.  Supporting productive academic teams. In G. Davies and E. Stacey (Eds.) Quality education @ a distance. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.  289-297.
(Considers the impact of developing online programmes upon academic perspectives and practices, and the implications for academic support units).

Fallshaw, E. (2003). Overseas partnerships – a case study in Quality Proceedings of the Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australia HERDSA 2003 conference, July 2003, 79-82. http://www.auqa.edu.au/auqf/2003/proceedings/AUQF2003_Proceedings.pdf
(Case study of a UK University offering a degree programme through an Asian partner institution offshore.  It describes the diverging practices surrounding application of performance measures in both locations, and the challenges facing institutions where emphasis is not placed on agreeing on an open and evidence based system of accountability and quality assurance from the outset).

Fallshaw, E., (2003). Fostering Quality in Partnerships, Proceedings of the Australian Universities Quality Forum, June 2003, pp. 4. www.auqa.edu.au/auqf/2003/program/papers/Fallshaw.pdf
(Examines a case study of an institutional partnership between an Australian institution and 20 learning partner providers internationally.  Overviews the teaching and learning service level agreement drawn up between the home institution and its partner educational providers).

Frydenberg, J. (2002). Quality Standards in eLearning: A Matrix of Analysis
International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 3, 2, October 2002,
www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/viewArticle/109/189
(Useful synopsis of nine identified dimensions taken from published quality standards in the US, and an analysis of emerging issues of elearning with respect to the dimensions).

Herrington, A., Herrington, J., Oliver, R., Stoney, S. & Willis, J. (2001). Quality guidelines for online courses: The development of an instrument to audit online units. In G. Kennedy, M. Keppell, C. McNaught & T. Petrovic (Eds.) Meeting at the crossroads: Proceedings of ASCILITE 2001, 263-270. Melbourne: The University of Melbourne. http://elrond.scam.ecu.edu.au/oliver/2001/qowg.pdf
(Proposes a framework for considering three critical elements in describing the online setting: pedagogies, resources and delivery strategies – and offers checklists for mapping each of these elements in turn).

Inglis, A. (2005). Quality Improvement, Quality Assurance, and Benchmarking: Comparing two frameworks for managing quality processes in open and distance learning 
The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, Vol 6, No 1 (2005), pp. 15.
(Identifies the difficulties facing managers of online and distance education centres in distinguishing between the related functions of quality improvement, quality assurance, and benchmarking).

Jung, I. (2005). Quality Assurance Survey of Mega-universities.  In C. McIntosh and Z. Varoglu (Eds.) Perspectives on Distance Education: Lifelong Learning and Distance Higher Education, (2). 79-95.
www.col.org/LLLinHigher/PSeries_LLLDHE.pdf
(Profile of 9 mega-universities i.e. those with over 100,000 students, engagement with the quality agenda)

Jung, I. (2005). Implications of WTO/ GATS on Quality Assurance of distance learning (including eLearning) for Higher Education.  Bangkok: UNESCO.
http://asiapacific-odl.oum.edu.my/C30/F97.pdf

(Consider the implication of global trade upon educational systems cross-nationally and the implications for strengthening quality frameworks).

McLoughlin, C. (2003). Perspectives on the quality of online education.  New conceptions of curriculum, student roles and learning?  In G. Davies and E. Stacey (Eds.) Quality education @ a distance. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 273-288.
(Argues for a greater orientation of quality assurance processes towards measures for student engagement as a way to make transparent expectations of what constitutes a good online learning experience from perspective of learners, researchers and developers).

McNaught, C. (2002). Quality Assurance for Online Courses: Implementing Policy at RMIT The Technology Source, January/February 2002.
http://technologysource.org/article/quality_assurance_for_online_courses/

(Discusses QA policy change, and provides a set of online links to resources, checklists and subject guide handbooks used at RMIT University, Australia).

McNaught, C. (2001). Quality Assurance for Online Courses: From policy to process to improvement? Conference Proceedings of Australian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education, ASCILITE 2001, pp.435-442. www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/melbourne01/pdf/papers/mcnaughtc.pdf
(Case study of Australian university-wide QA system for online courses – including an institutional checklist for supporting online course production)

Olsen, A. (2002). eLearning in Asia: Supply and demand.  International Higher Education: The Boston College Center for International Higher Education, No. 30, Winter 2003, 8-9.www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/soe/cihe/newsletter/ihe_pdf/ihe30.pdf#search='Olsen%2C%20A.%20%282002%29.%20eLearning%20in%20Asia.'
(This short article is based upon a report of same name prepared for the Observatory of Borderless Higher Education).

Parker, Nancy K. (2003). The Quality Dilemma in Online Education In Anderson, T. & Elloumi, F. (Eds.), Theory and Practice of Online Learning, 385–421 (Athabasca University)  http://cde.athabascau.ca/online_book/
(Examines quality standards and management frameworks that have been proposed for the delivery of online instruction in Australia, the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States.  It is argued that thinking on quality assurance will have to shift dramatically from external ‘compliance based approaches’ toward ‘comparative benchmarking’ and mutual recognition for international quality standards but that many frameworks fail because they lack a consistent and comprehensible measurement of learning outcomes).

Phipps, R. & Merisotis, J. (1999). What's the Difference? A Review of Contemporary Research on the Effectiveness of Distance Learning in Higher Education. The Institute for Higher Education Policy www.ihep.com/Pubs/PDF/Difference.pdf
(An examination of studies into effectiveness of distance learning but points to the need for more detailed research into individual programmes.  Argues that an area of needed research relates to assessing programme quality (versus course quality) looking at differences between and drop-out rates of groups of online learners).

Phipps, R. & Merisotis, J. (2000). Quality on the Line: Benchmarks for success in internet-based distance education. The Institute for Higher Education Policy www.ihep.com/Pubs/PDF/Quality.pdf
(Identifies 23 benchmarks divided into 7 categories of quality measure used across US campuses for demonstrating the quality of online distance learning. The report was sponsored by National Education Association and Blackboard Inc.).

Reid, I. (2003). Quality goes online: New challenges for distance education. In In G. Davies and E. Stacey (Eds.) Quality education @ a distance. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 249-256.
(Presents five perspectives on current quality models present among Australian universities and draws out implications for online distance education).

Sinclair, R. (2003). Components of quality in distance education: Distance education guidelines from different countries.  In G. Davies and E. Stacey (Eds.) Quality education @ a distance. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 257-272.
(Through an examination of national practices, it considers institutional engagement with students, and proposes institutional guidelines for improving student perceptions of programme quality).

Stronach I., Sirca N. & Dimc N. (eds) (2000) Ways towards Quality in Education. Open Society/Sola za Ravnatelje, Ljubljana, Slovenia
www.fm-kp.si/zalozba/isbn/961-6268-47-3.htm
(This includes I. Stronach’s paper, Quality is the key, but is Education the lock? Turning education around through quality).

Varoglu, Z. (2005). The Higher Education Open and Distance Learning Knowledge Base, in Perspectives on Distance Education: Lifelong Learning and Distance Higher Education, C. McIntosh and Z. Varoglu (Eds.)pp. 97-105.  www.col.org/LLLinHigher/PSeries_LLLDHE.pdf
(Provides an introduction to information and tools for policy planning, development and management of online distance learning at the national level).

White, S. (2000). Quality assurance and learning technologies: intersecting agendas in UK higher education. Quality Assurance in Education 8(1) pp. 7-15.
(Well grounded discussion of the role of learning technologies supporting innovation in the quality assessments).

Wood, D. & George, R. (2003). Quality standards in online teaching and learning: A tool for authors and developers. In G. Crisp, D. Thiele, I. Scholten, S. Barker and J. Baron (Eds) Interact, Integrate, Impact: Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference of the Australian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education, ASCILITE, Adelaide, 7-10 December 2003, 552-561.
www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/adelaide03/program/conf_prog_index.htm
(Identifies the academic dilemma of developing materials for which quality guidelines have yet to be formulated.  Proposes the use of a review tool comprising a paper-based checklist of agreed good practice).

Wood, D. & George, R. (2003). Promoting the quality of online courses Proceedings of the Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australia HERDSA 2003 conference, July 2003, pp. 10. http://surveys.canterbury.ac.nz/herdsa03/pdfsref/Y1063.pdf
(Report on formative and summative evaluation of a quality review instrument designed to support academic staff involved in the development of online courses).

Srikanthan, G. & Dalrymple, J. (2003). Developing a Holistic Model for Quality in Higher Education Quality in Higher Education, Vol. 8, No. 3, 215–224.
(Offers insights into current institutional QA practices through an examination of educational quality models but argues for a more holistic approach – though the article sometimes conflates issues at the course, programme, institutional and educational system level)

As referenced earlier, the Global Distance Education Network (GDENet www.gdenet.org/) website offers valuable resources to practitioners – particularly those in developing nations.

Many institutions now run academic support websites.  For instance, Penn State University has a project website on Innovations in Distance Education: An emerging set of guiding principles for the design and development of distance education.  The project funded by the AT&T Foundation has been running from 1995.
www.outreach.psu.edu/DE/IDE/guiding_principles/
A project report incorporating the guidelines is available at:
www.worldcampus.psu.edu/ide/docs/guiding_principles.pdf

The University of South Australia provides an extensive set of resources for academics to address quality issues in online teaching and learning by identifying the standards by which online courses are judged and by providing support for academics to develop their own scholarship of teaching in the area of online learning in order to make these judgements.
www.unisanet.unisa.edu.au/resources/online-eval/index.htm

 

4.0       QA in China

Brook, P.A., Chen, W., and Luo, Q., (2003). A Comparison of Faculty Evaluation Systems between China and Canada. Proceedings of the 2003 Midwest Research to Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing and Community Education, Ohio State University, Oct. 2003.
(Short comparative summary of teaching evaluation and quality procedures).

Cuthbert, L., Chen, Y., and Ying, Y., (2004). A flagship of international educational co-operation.
(Unpublished paper of joint degree programme between Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications (BUPT) and Queen Mary, University of London.  Synopsis available at www.elec.qmul.ac.uk/international/JointDegreeProgrammes.htm).

Chen, J. (2006). Development and Evaluation of Distance Education Pilot Programs in China Proceedings of the 10th IACEE World Conference on Continuing Engineering Education (WCCEE), April 2006, Vienna, Austria, pp.7.
http://www.wccee2006.org/papers/346.pdf

(Provides a summary of the main mechanisms to monitor quality issues in relation to the learning centres; namely: the Distance Learning Centre Acceptance Inspection (DLCAI), Distance Learning Centre Evaluation Criteria (DLCEC) and Evaluation Criteria of University with Distance Education (ECUDE).  The DLCEC provides a 35-itemed check points for assessing the performance of learning centres).

Dong, Y., Huang, R., Li, X., & Shen, R. (2003). The development and revision of “online” courseware quality certification standards. E-education Research, 6.
http://www.vschool.net.cn/paper/2003/%A1%B6%CD%F8%C2%E7%BF%CE%B3%CC%BF%CE%BC%FE%D6%CA%C1%BF%C8%CF%D6%A4%B1%EA%D7%BC%A1%B7%B5%C4%D1%D0%D6%C6%D3%EB%D0%DE%B6%A9.PDF 
(Examines the nature of revisions for proposed quality indicators following a development study into their effectiveness and value.  Recommendations include a change of status from required to optional status for a number of the proposed indicators).

He, D., Guan, B., Jiang, T. & Zhu, J. (2004). The establishment of a distance education network in continuing education and its learning process management. Proceedings of the 9th World Conference on Continuing Engineering Education, Tokyo 15-20th May 2004, pp.6.

Hou, T. (2004). OPEN Commonwealth Support System of Distance Education (PCSSODE): A Practice of Supplement Quality Assurance System of E-Education in China International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, (1), No 12. Dec 2004, 13-18 http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Dec_04/Dec_04.pdf
(Describes a model for establishing a public commonwealth support system of e-education in China.  It reports on the three-tried framework incorporating distance education headquarters, regional centres and local study centres – and the relationships between these organisational levels).

Huang, F. (2003). Transnational Higher Education: A perspective from China, Higher Education Research and Development, Vol. 22, No. 2, July 2003, 193-203
(Summary of the key trends in transnational education, focusing on franchises, articulation and twinning, charting the changing profile of providers over time).

Huang, R., Zhang, J., & Dong, Y. (2004). Research and Practice of the Accreditation for Network Course, e-mentor, 4 (6), 20-24.
(Evaluation report of an experimental project into certification standards which could be used in relation to networked courses).

Huang, R. (2003). Research and experiments on quality certification of online curricula. China Distance Education, 21.
www.vschool.net.cn/paper/2003/%CD%F8%C2%E7%BF%CE%B3%CC%D6%CA%C1%BF%C8%CF%D6%A4%B5%C4%D1%D0%BE%BF%D3%EB%CA%D4%D1%E9.PDF 
(Outlines a certification model for standardising network courseware quality and reports on its implementation across 124 courses, offering suggestions for continuing improvement of the model). 

Huang, R., & Cao, Y. (2003). On the teaching quality of current online education. China Distance Education, 11.
http://www.vschool.net.cn/paper/2003/%CA%D4%C2%DB%B5%B1%C7%B0%CD%F8%C2%E7%BD%CC%D3%FD%B5%C4%BD%CC%D1%A7%D6%CA%C1%BF.PDF
(Report of a State-level project initiated in 2002 focusing on accreditation criteria for course preparation, learning management, learning support and learning evaluation. It uses a Plan – Do – Check – Act model for implementation).

Huang, R., Zhang, J., & Dong, Y. (2001). A study of certification standards of online teaching process. Open Education Research, 4.
(Report of a development project requiring specification of online teaching processes).

Jung, I. (2005). Innovative and good practices of open and distance learning in Asia and the Pacific.  Bangkok: UNESCO. www.unescobkk.org/fileadmin/user_upload/apeid/odl_innov.pdf
(Survey of 12 institutions into their experiences of innovation and good practices in online distance education, including the CCRTVUs in China).

Luo, X., & Huang, R. (2001). The current situation of research on the standardization of international online education information. Open Education Research, 5.

Song, Gilsun (2006). eLearning in China – Government Policies and Pilot Universities Proceedings of the 10th IACEE World Conference on Continuing Engineering Education (WCCEE), April 2006, Vienna, Austria http://www.wccee2006.org/papers/380.pdf
(Provides an account of the factors influencing the development of pilot online institutes usefully summarising the changing regulatory environment for the learner support centres).

Yang, T. and Deng, X. (2004).  A survey and Analysis of Factors that influence Distance Education Quality Assurance Systems, Distance Education in China (1), 2004, 129-135
(Report of a study into RTVU and online institutes’ survey responses to 8 dimensions of quality control which might be used in establishing quality standards).

Zhang, W., (2004). Quality Assurance Online: Development, Validation and Utilisation of the Online Learning Environment Scale (OLES) Distance Education in China (1), 2004, 173-184.
(Report of a project involving 11 conventional and open universities internationally, which devised a scale involving 70 items across 8 dimensions for assessing the quality of their programme provision).