As growing numbers of countries adopt market-oriented policies for steering higher education, there is increasing interest in accountability mechanisms that improve the capacity of colleges and universities to independently assure the quality of their academic degrees and student learning. Academic audit, first developed in the UK and subsequently adapted to countries such as Sweden, New Zealand and Hong Kong, offers such an approach. What problems have these countries encountered in implementing academic audits with regard to: the focus of audits; the selection and training of audit teams; the nature of audit self-studies; the conduct of audit visits; audit reports; and audit follow-up and enhancement activities? This paper reviews the lessons learned from these early experiments with academic audit and suggests guidelines for the design and implementation of effective audit processes.
[Copyright of Quality in Higher Education is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13538320020005945]

As countries convert from state to market-centered public policies, there is increasing interest in new forms of public accountability. Capacity building initiatives that reform institutional frameworks are useful policy instruments during this period of transition. What are the impacts and implementation problems characteristic of this approach? This article reviews the experience with "Academic Audit," a capacity building accountability instrument for universities adopted in the UK, Sweden, New Zealand, and Hong Kong. Academic audits altered the incentives for cooperative behavior among faculty members to improve student learning. Identified implementation problems included: training for the new process, the uncertainty of capacity building benefits, and the central role of information.
[Copyright of Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13876980008412643 ]