Battling Academic Corruption in Higher Education: Does External Quality Assurance (EQA) Offer a Ray of Hope?
The post-1980s changes in the global higher education landscape have triggered a burgeoning of incidents of academic corruption in higher education institutions. Since 2000, the discourse on how to combat academic corruption has gained traction in higher education and quality assurance is advanced as one of the strategies for fighting corruption in higher education. In 2016, UNESCO (and the Council for Higher Education Accreditation) issued a “wakeup call” to quality assurance systems to take up a leading role in the battle against academic corruption. However, a dearth of empirical and conceptual studies on how the quality assurance systems, in general, and external quality assurance systems, in particular, can take up a leading role in the crusade against academic corruption exists. This conceptual paper, using the crime-punishment model as an analytical lens, explores how the national quality assurance agencies (and systems) can exercise the leadership role in combating academic corruption. The paper advances the setting of academic integrity standards, institutional and programme accreditation, accreditation of academic journals, sharing information and promoting whistleblowing, monitoring of institutions, applying sanctions, and ranking of higher education institutions on the basis of integrity indicators as options that are available to quality assurance agencies in the exercise of their leadership role in combating academic corruption. These approaches are hypothesised to create both incentives and disincentives for the institutions and staff in connection with engaging in academic corruption. Nevertheless, the paper takes cognisance of the fact that external quality assurance is necessary but not sufficient in combating corruption at the level of the academy.
Chapman, D.W. (2002). Sectoral dimensions of corruption. In B. Spector (Ed.), Pervasive corruption: Strategies for prevention in developing countries. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press.
Council for Higher Education Accreditation [CHEA] International Quality Group Annual Meeting. (2016, January 25-27). Quality assurance and academic corruption: Can QA make a difference?
Easton, J.S.(2018). Combating Academic Corruption: Quality Assurance and Acreditation. International Higher Education, 93, 8-9. https://doi.org/10.6017/ihe.0.93.10426
Hallak, J. & Poisson, M. (2007a). Academic fraud, accreditation and quality assurance: Learning from the past and challenges for the future. In Higher education in the World 2007 Report. Barcelona: GUNI.
Hallak, J. & Poisson, M. (2007b).Corrupt schools, corrupt universities: What can be done? Paris: Institute for International Educational Planning.
Heyneman, S. (2013). Higher education institutions: Why they matter and why corruption puts them at risk. In Global corruption report: Education (pp. 101-07). London: Routledge.
Kranacher, M.J. (2013).Combating financial fraud in higher education. In Global corruption report: Education (pp. 114-18). London: Routledge.
Martin, M & Poisson, M. (2015). Corruption in higher education: Can quality assurance make a difference? Policy Brief No.5. CHEA International Quality Group.
Martin, M. (2016). External quality assurance in higher education: How can it address corruption and other malpractices? Quality Assurance in Higher Education, 22(1), 49-63. Doi: 10.1080/13538322.2016.1144903
Mohamedbhai, G. (2016). The scourge of fraud and corruption in higher education. International Higher Education, 84, 12-14.
Mohamedbhai, G. (2017, May). Corruption in higher education: An overview. IAU Horizons, 22(1).
O’Malley, B. (2017).What are QA bodies doing to tackle academic corruption? University World News. Global Edition Issue 477.
O’Malley, B. (2018). Developing countries showing way to fight fraud. University World News. Global Edition Issue 488.
Osipian, A.L. (2007). Corruption in higher education: Conceptual approaches and measurement techniques. Research in Comparative and International Education, 2(4), 311-32.
Osipian, A.L. (2008). Corruption in higher education: Does it differ across the nations and why? Research in Comparative and International Education, 3(4), 342-65.
Rumyantseva, N.L. (2005). Taxonomy of corruption in higher education. Pedagogy Journal of Education, 80(1), 81-89.
Stensaker, B. (2013). Ensuring quality in quality assurance. In Global Corruption Report: Education (pp. 124-32). London: Routledge.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation [UNESCO] and Council for Higher Education Accreditation [CHEA]. (2016). Advisory Statement for Effective International Practice (Combating Corruption and Enhancing Integrity: A Contemporary Challenge for the Quality and Credibility of Higher Education).
van’t Land, J. (2017). Corruption in higher education. IAU Horizons, 22(1).
Vincent-Lancrin, S. (2013). Cross-border higher education: Addressing corruption, ensuring opportunity. In Global Corruption Report: Education (pp. 142-47). London: Routledge.
Copyright (c) 2019 Lazarus Nabaho, Wilberforce Turyasingura
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with HLRC agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and publishing rights without restrictions and grant the journal right of first publication. Authors grant Laureate Education, Inc. a license to publish and distribute the work under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in HLRC.
- Authors who submit manuscripts are to declare that their submission to HLRC is not simultaneously under consideration for publication in another journal and has not been published elsewhere previously.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the HLRC's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in HLRC.
- Pre-refereeing and pre-publication: To ensure consistency in the information available to researchers and to safeguard the blind peer-review process, authors are asked to abstain from self-archiving or posting online the submitted manuscript before the review process is complete.
- Post-refereeing and post-publication: Authors are free to self-archive and distribute the peer-reviewed and editorially reviewed version of their work. As a full open access journal, there is no embargo period. Authors are encouraged to archive the published PDF version, which includes a suggested citation with all pertinent information, including a digital object identifier (DOI). If the author decides to self-archive or distribute the work in a format other than the published PDF, the author must include the assigned DOI and acknowledge the work was first published in HLRC.