Background  

The impact of globalization becomes more and more visible in education. In the last two decades, the liberalization of national economies, the domination of supranational institutions, the disempowerment of nation-states, the increasing prevalence of the system and culture of liberal democracy as well as the formation of a consumer culture across the globe have made many initially different aspects of the world more alike (Mok, 2003). There are three important international trends: an increase in the number of democratic states; economic globalization; and educational reforms introduced in the light of the challenges of the new millennium (Law, 2004). To respond to the pressures of globalization and to enhance the “competitiveness” of their overall citizenry (Ng, 2008), many countries have established quality assurance mechanisms in higher education.

Compared with some “pioneering countries”, such as the United Kingdom and the Netherland, conducting quality assurance in China is relatively recent.  The Evaluation of University Baccalaureate Programs (EUBP) only started in 2002 and inspections of 609 universities and colleges were completed in 2008 (Wang & Liu, 2009).

Research questions

Recent comparative educational policy studies have demonstrated that, even though similar cases of higher education exist in some educationally sophisticated countries, reforms vary according to political and economic contexts (Honig, 2009; Mok & Lo, 2002). Our study explores differences in methods of quality assurance adopted in China. It also highlights the roles and problems of evaluation systems implementation in China. The research questions are:  

(a) What are the purposes and unique features of EUBP in China?

(b)What are the characteristics of EUBP in China?

(c) What are the impacts of EUBP on institutions and individuals (university teachers) in the case of selected higher education institutions in Guangdong province?

Theoretical framework

Quality assurance is not a new idea in higher education. It has developed different deep meanings and mechanisms over time. Quality assurance systems in many countries have a more systematic and far reaching approach to ensure that universities have efficient mechanisms for assessment and improvement (Harman, 1998).They have both internal and external arrangements .Harman has summarized the external review systems in many countries, concluding that there are core dimensions of management: responsible agency/unit (national or system level and institutional level), participation in reviews and other activities, methodologies of review and assessment, focus (national or system level and institutional level), purposes, and reporting and follow-up activities. Building on these core dimensions, initially we highlight the operational realities of complex implementation system of EUBP in China and then explore both the perceived positive and negative impacts of the EUBP on institutions and teachers.

Harman, G. (1998). The management of quality assurance: A review of international practice. Higher Education Quarterly, 52(4), 345-364. Honig, M. I. (2009). What works in defining “what works” in educational improvement. In G. Sykes, B. Schneider, D. N. Plank, & T. G. Ford (Eds.), Handbook of education policy research (pp. 333-347). New York: Routledge. Law, W. W. (2004). Translating globalization and democratization into local policy: Educational reform in Hong Kong and Taiwan. International Review of Education, 50(5-6), 497-524. Mok, K. H. (2003). Globalisation and higher education restructuring in Hong Kong, Taiwan and Mainland China. Higher Education Research & Development, 22(2), 117-129. Mok, K. H., & Lo, H. C. (2002). Marketization and the changing governance in higher education: A comparative study. Higher Education Management and Policy, 14(1), 51-82. Ng, P. T. (2008). The phases and paradoxes of educational quality assurance: The case of the Singapore education system. Quality Assurance in Education, 16(2), 112-125. Wang, Y. J., & Liu, B. C. (2009). The thirty years of educational reform in China: Higher education. Beijing: Beijing Normal University.