At the heart of the Accord, there are two goals that sit uncomfortably together: growing enrolments and improving higher education quality.
Online education delivery is touted as a key solution to that tension: promising scale and capacity to directly reach a number of key demographics the Accord prioritises, including regional and rural students, people with disabilities or caring responsibilities, low socio economic and First Nations students.
The unresolved problem is that as institutions look to build their online cohorts, how can we assure learning for students who have never set foot on campus?
A new briefing paper from Curtin’s Professor Mollie Dollinger (Curtin University) and twelve co-authors takes a serious crack at resolving the conundrum.
Assurance of Learning in Fully Online Credentialled Programs emerged from a two-day Sydney symposium and offers three verification models for institutions to consider: supervised assessments at approved locations, accredited workplace supervision, and longitudinal synchronous learning partnerships.
“The models are practical. The challenge is what they demand. Each requires investment in staffing, infrastructure, and coordination. The paper refers to this as the "quality-scale paradox." It names the problem clearly but does not pretend to resolve it,” Professor Dollinger said.
“That honesty matters. 60% of academic staff are still on casual or fixed-term contracts. Online provision is too often treated as the cheaper option. If institutions want online credentials to carry weight, they will need to fund the assurance mechanisms that make them defensible.”
“This is both a regulatory necessity, but also a matter of institutional self-assurance. Providers should want the credibly to warrant the capability of their graduates, regardless of how the regulatory environment evolves.”
“The frameworks are now on the table. The question is whether the sector will use them.”