Establishing the NZQA and the Development of the NQF

According to Smithers (1 997), "following consultation on the Hawke Report, and

clearly influenced by the SCOTVEC model, the government brought out a policy

Chapter Four: The Study Contexts 1 1 2 proposals for a NEQA17. Subsequently the Education Amendment Act ( 1 990) created a new body in the name of the New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA). The NZQA was entrusted with the responsibility for QA in the tertiary education sector, but this excluded the university sector 1 8. The polytechnics -were required to follow processes and requirements laid down by the NZQA. At a later date, the NZQA and NZVCC, delegated authority to their associated bodies, in order to implement QA within tertiary education providers. A key task of the NZQA was the introduction of the National Qualifications Framework (NQF). The Education Amendment Act, 1 990, introduced a single regulatory framework for all TEIs.

The most significant development, in assuring quality in institutions such as ABC College, has been the development of the NQF. The NQF, according to NZQA ( 1 99 1 a, 1 99 1 c, 2007), IS the basis for co-ordinating and integrating a coherent, flexible, post-compulsory education and training sector. A unified system was developed with the intention of breaking down the artificial binary division between academic and vocational education (Smithers, 1 997). The NQF was developed with the concept of common building blocks19 distributed over eight levels placed over a single, 'harmonised' qualifications framework. Each level arbitrarily represents progressively more complex or difficult outcomes required of learners (NZQA, 1 99 1 a, 1 99 1 c, 1 993). All learning, whether academic or vocational, was organised into units, which were described in terms of outcomes. This new system was intended to be flexible and was designed to maximise transferability of: existing knowledge to fresh but related challenges; skills from one domain to another; and qualifications within and between different institutions (Roberts, 1 997, pp. 1 65-1 66). Whilst all the polytechnics, three of the five colleges of education and the majority of the PTEs

17 The policy paper identifies the role of this new body as: "to co-ordinate national secondary school qualifications, national vocational qualifications and national advanced academic qualifications" (Ministry of Education, 1989b, p. 44).

18 The responsibility for quality in the university sector was delegated to the NZVCC. In any case, the universities had earlier expressed their opposition to close involvement with the proposed NEQA. The NZQA was also required under the legislation to consult with the NZVCC, before establishing policies that would refer to universities.

19 The building blocks, which were the 'units of learning', eventually came to be known as 'unit standards'. Qualifications were to be obtained by the aggregation of unit standards. An eight-level framework was initially established by the NZQA with Level I being the lowest and equal to School Certificate (a national certificate attained at the end of year 1 1) and Level 8 the highest at post-graduate qualifications. Levels 1-4 led to National Certificates, whilst Levels 5-6 included post school qualifications and covered a range of learning from pre-employment level to diplomas. Level 7 was assigned to initial degrees, whilst higher degrees and higher certificates and diplomas, including masters and doctoral degrees, were assigned level 8 (NZQA, 1 991a, 1 99 1b; 1993).

were, by 1 997, accredited to offer some unit standards, none of the universities became involved in the NQF.

The rhetoric underpinning the introduction of reforms of New Zealand qualifications has been a complex combination of government, bureaucratic, business and educational influences (Roberts, 1 997, p. 1 65). Many have argued against the instrumentalist logic embodied in the NQF and particularly the inappropriateness and unsuitability of such atomised learning in the university sector (Blackmur, 2002,

2004; Codd, 1 997; Hall, 1 994; NZVCC, 1 994). The NZQA intended to remove the

distinction between the vocational and academic modes of education. It was alleged that the emphasis on skills, relevant to the world of work, which was advanced by employers and politicians, influenced the NZQA discourses and practices. Codd, McAlpine and Poskitt ( 1 995) portray tensions between 'educational' and 'political' approaches to assessment. They consider the former as involving greater professionalism in education, whilst the latter embodies the New Right discourse of accountability, managerialism and market forces - the 'marketisation imperative' . Hence, i t i s clearly evident that these policy reforms in qualifications have been fraught with controversy, since they were driven by contradictory and competing objectives.

Amidst an atmosphere of discord and stalemate and in order to resolve these issues, the Tertiary Lead Group (TLG) was set up by the Minister of Education in 1 994. The TLG was charged with the challenging task of 'how' to incorporate degrees into the national qualifications framework (TLG, 1 994). Subsequently, the TLG unanimously recommended that all degrees be incorporated into a single harmonised qualifications framework. Their report also recommended the setting up of a Tertiary Qualifications Co-ordinating Committee and a Tertiary Action Group (TAG), to advise the NZQA Board on the implementation of the single harmonised qualifications framework. The TAG in turn recommended that all qualifications and their component parts be expressed in terms of learning outcomes (TAG, 1 996). Under the modified NQF regime, provider qualifications would be part of the future structure but would be required to meet three 'quality' criteria: ( 1 ) have level and credit specificity, (2) provide an assurance of quality, and (3) have clearly specified outcomes (Hall, 1 997). In March 200 1 , after extensive consultations with the NZVCC, the Association of Polytechnics New Zealand (APNZ) and the Association of Colleges of Education in New Zealand (ACENZ), the NZQA Board agreed to expand the NQF and establish

Chapter Four: The Study Contexts 1 1 4 the Register of Quality Assured Qualifications, now commonly referred to as 'the Register' (NZQA, 2003).