Contextual Challenges for Quality Assurance and Accreditation (QAA) program for Higher Education Institutions in Nepal

Kathmandu: The Quality Assurance and Accreditation (QAA) program of the University Grants Commission (UGC) Nepal aspires to bring substantial transformation in higher education institutions through systematic evaluation and accreditation processes. This program establishes a standardized framework that evaluates higher education institutions on different quality parameters such as organizational structure, departmentalization, design, infrastructure, technological integration, and research-based activities.

According to the UGC, Nepal’s Quality Assurance and Accreditation (QAA) system was first implemented in 2007 as a key component of the Second Higher Education Project (SHEP). The International Development Agency (IDA) and The World Bank supported the fund financially and technically. The QAA has been gradually improvised with time.

More importantly, with international standardization of higher education in Nepal, the QAA program aims to enhance the quality of higher education at both institutional and program levels, necessary for developing globally competent human resources. However, the Quality Assurance and Accreditation program for Higher Education Institutions in Nepal has numerous contextual difficulties.

Firstly, with a regulatory framework that governs higher education institutions in Nepal through the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology, multiple stakeholders of higher education feel that the education policies, guidelines, and directives of the Ministry already provide a basic structure for quality assurance. Hence, there is no need for an additional layer of oversight like QAA.

Likewise, this has opened up a new debate regarding the difference that the QAA-certificated institute can make in the education sector. There is a growing concern about QAA that the program would remain as just another administrative exercise. Another issue with Quality QAA is that, because of its standardized and linear protocols, this program overlooks non-linear and innovative differences among higher education institutions in Nepal that are fulfilling the higher education needs of specific student segments in their distinct ways.

Financial Constraints in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs)

A significant number of public and private higher education institutions in Nepal operate under budget constraints. This makes them depend on government funds for their functionalities, and with financial liabilities that barely hang on break-even points.

QAA program also relies on financial support from international donor agencies and government grants to conduct its quality assurance activities and without a consistent, inclusive, and sustainable funding model, many higher education institutions in Nepal would struggle to maintain their accreditation status or engage fully with the QAA process. Besides, those institutions that have QAA certification need to undergo a renewal process every five years to maintain their accredited status.

Moreover, many institutions are reluctant to divert their operational efforts to achieve quality standards prescribed within the QAA module as this certification may not yield proportional benefits given the crisis of relevance in Nepalese higher education due to student decline, sluggish economic growth, and mass exodus of students to foreign universities. More importantly the Quality Assurance and Accreditation (QAA) program till now has not achieved significant competitive or comparative advantage even for those institutions that have acquired accreditation.

Besides, the ethos of the QAA program like the internationalization of higher education and development of globally competent skilled human resources seems a bit too exaggerated considering the socio-economic and political condition of Nepal.

Increasing Number of HEIs and Disproportional Economic Growth

In the past few decades, Nepal has indeed witnessed a substantial surge in the number of universities and higher education institutions. Although there is an increasing trend for establishing public universities in Nepal, this trend has not been supported by the expansion of the industrial complex, research and development activities, innovations, infrastructure development, multi-sectoral economic growth, increase in public/private enterprises, and a significant amount of job creations in start-ups and new businesses in Nepal.

Despite the increase in HEIs, Nepal’s economic growth has been inconsistent and disproportionate to the increasing numbers of graduates entering the job market.

As the Nepalese economy still struggles with challenges such as political instability, inadequate infrastructure, and limited investment in key sectors, as a result, many graduates find themselves either unemployed or underemployed.

Internet Culture and Trolling in Nepal

Besides, due to clumsy business regulatory frameworks together with inconsistent support for entrepreneurs from government agencies, even graduates of HEIs with excellent business plans and start-up prototypes, choose to pursue employment opportunities overseas rather than engage, struggle, and make contributions towards the local economy.

Here, it is also important to realize that the lack of economic growth diminishes the immediate need for stringent quality assurance measures necessary for aligning educational outcomes with industry requirements.

Moreover, for the long-term sustainability and growth of the higher education system in Nepal, apart from increasing the number of public universities, UGC also needs to recommend the government to designate areas as Special Economic Zones where new universities have been established and formulate education policies that encourage business, public enterprises, industries, and corporates to collaborate, invest and have ownership in public universities.

After all, academic partnerships between universities and businesses are necessary for developing component human resources that can integrate into and stimulate the growth of the local economy.

Besides, the government of Nepal needs to develop industrial complexes where entrepreneurs can start their businesses with limited overhead costs.

Assuring Quality in Higher Education is a Collective Responsibility

There are about 82 accredited HEIs in Nepal with Quality Assurance and Accreditation and the growing number of accredited institutions indeed reflects an increasing recognition for quality assurance among higher education institutions in Nepal.

However, as quality guru W. Edwards put forth rather succinctly,“ quality is everyone’s responsibility” and in the context of Nepal, the University Grants Commission (UGC) needs to realize that its concern for quality in higher education can’t remain as insular, trapped within its self- the referential practices that derive its legitimacy only from the academic institutions.

Assuring quality in higher education in Nepal requires a collective responsibility that involves commitments and comprehensive support from multiple stakeholders such as parents, entrepreneurs, policymakers, political groups, government and non-government agencies, corporations, student unions, and various other public and private institutions.

Hence, UGC needs to engage with multiple and divergent stakeholders outside of the academic domain and make them cognizant, responsible, and integral parts of quality assurance procedures. After all, quality can’t be assured in academic institutions when multiple stakeholders of higher education in Nepal have varying, divergent, and even misleading levels of commitment to quality assurance.

(Gaurav Ojha is a writer, researcher, and educator at different educational institutions)