Science for Education Today, 2021, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 123–153
© Savina A. D., Ponomareva E. A., 2021
UDC: 
338.2

Evaluating the impact of transition to risk-based regulation in higher education institutions

Savina A. D. 1 (Moscow, Russian Federation), Ponomareva E. A. 1 (Moscow, Russian Federation)
1 Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration
Full text (Open Access) — Downloaded 832
Abstract: 

Introduction. The study examines the problem of building an effective quality management system for education to improve its quality by changing the mechanisms of quality assurance and surveillance. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of the transition to a risk-based regulation in higher education institutions.
Materials and methods. The study was conducted using the methodology of mathematical modeling, namely, simulation models of certain types of state quality management and surveillance in the field of higher education: licensing, licensing management, quality assurance mechanisms and state supervision. Modeling was carried out using the Anylogic software. The models were calibrated on the basis of statistical data from the Federal State Information System ‘Unified Register of Inspections’: a total of 1,542 inspections for four types of assessment from 2014 to 2019. The main indicators to be evaluated were the duration of assessment and supervisory measures for each type of control, as well as expenses for their implementation.
Results. The study reveals that the transition to risk-based regulation in the field of higher education is accompanied by significant positive changes - a reduction in the load both in terms of the assessment duration and costs of its implementation. It is shown that for a more accurate assessment of these effects, it is necessary to take into account the differences in the structure and quantitative characteristics of processes of different types of control. The quantity of the effects is determined by the choice of characteristics of the risk-based approach model: the proportion of high-risk objects and the probability of detecting violations as a result of checking them. The proposed methodology developed by the authors can be used to make management decisions by comparing models of quality management and surveillance of universities.
Conclusion. The research findings empirically confirmed the need to move from the current system of quality management in the field of higher education to a risk-based regulation. Adopting this approach will reduce the burden both on the subject of control - the Federal Service for Supervision in Education and Science, and on the objects - higher education institutions.

Keywords: 

Higher education; Mandatory requirements; Licensing of educational activities; Licensing control; Quality control of educational activities; State supervision; Inspection costs; Risk-based regulation; Simulation modelling.

URL WoS/RSCI: https://www.webofscience.com/wos/rsci/full-record/RSCI:45741072

For citation:
Savina A. D., Ponomareva E. A. Evaluating the impact of transition to risk-based regulation in higher education institutions. Science for Education Today, 2021, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 123–153. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15293/2658-6762.2102.06
References: 
  1. Dobrolyubova E. I., Yuzhakov V. N. Evaluating effectiveness and efficiency of the control (supervision) activities. Public Administration Issues, 2015, no. 4, pp. 41–64. (In Russian) URL: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=25292069
  2. Yuzhakov V. N., Dobrolyubova E. I., Pokida A. N., Zybunovskaya N. V. Inspection and regulatory enforcement reform: Evaluation from the citizen perspective. Public Administration Issues, 2019, no. 2, pp. 71–92. (In Russian) URL: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=38510949
  3. Yuzhakov V. N., Dobrolyubova E. I., Pokida A. N., Zybunovskaya N. V. Evaluating performance of regulatory enforcement activities by businesses: Key trends. Public Administration Issues, 2020, no. 2, pp. 32–53. (In Russian) URL: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=43011442
  4. Pratolo S., Sofyani H., Anwar M. Performance-based budgeting implementation in higher education institutions: Determinants and impact on quality. Cogent Business & Management, 2020, vol. 7 (1), pp. 1786315. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2020.1786315
  5. Pham H. T., Nguyen C. H. Academic staff quality and the role of quality assurance mechanisms: the Vietnamese case. Quality in Higher Education, 2020, vol. 26 (3), pp. 262–283. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2020.1761603
  6. Sinelnikov-Murylev S. G., Idrisov G. I., Ponomareva E. A. Reform of control and supervision of higher education in new conditions. Educational Policy, 2020, no. 3, pp. 22–29. (In Russian) DOI: https://doi.org/10.22394/2078-838X-2020-3-22-29 URL: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=44568590
  7. Barrow M. Quality‐management systems and dramaturgical compliance. Quality in Higher Education, 1999, vol. 5 (1), pp. 27–36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1353832990050103
  8. Hou A. Y. C., Kuo C. Y., Chen K. H. J., Hill C., Lin S. R., Chun-Chi Chih J., Chou H. C. The implementation of self-accreditation policy in Taiwan higher education and its challenges to university internal quality assurance capacity building. Quality in Higher Education, 2018, vol. 24 (3), pp. 238–259. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2018.1553496
  9. Lucander H., Christersson C. Engagement for quality development in higher education: A process for quality assurance of assessment. Quality in Higher Education, 2020, vol. 26 (2), pp. 135–155. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2020.1761008

10. Prosekov A. Y., Morozova I. S., Filatova E. V. A Case study of graduate quality: Subjective opinions of participants in the sphere of education. European Journal of Contemporary Education, 2020, vol. 9 (1), pp. 114–125. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13187/ejced.2020.1.114 URL: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=42762045

11. Dicker R., Garcia M., Kelly A., Mulrooney H., What does ‘quality’ in higher education mean? Perceptions of staff, students and employers. Studies in Higher Education, 2019, vol. 44 (8), pp. 1425–1441. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018.1445987

12. Pratasavitskaya H., Stensaker B. Quality management in higher education: Towards a better understanding of an emerging field. Quality in Higher Education, 2010, vol. 16 (1), pp. 37–50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13538321003679465

13. Seyfried M., Pohlenz P. Assessing quality assurance in higher education: quality managers’ perceptions of effectiveness. European Journal of Higher Education, 2018, vol. 8 (3), pp. 258–271. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2018.1474777

14. Chaplinsky A. V., Plaksin S. M. Risk management in the implementation of state control in Russia. Public Administration Issues, 2016, no. 2, pp. 7–29. (In Russian) URL: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=26154968

15. van der Heijden J. Risk governance and risk-based regulation: A review of the international academic literature. State of the Art in Regulatory Governance Research Paper Series, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3406998

16. Ehren M. C. M., Honingh M. E. Risk-based school inspections in the Netherlands: A critical reflection on intended effects and causal mechanisms. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 2011, vol. 37 (4), pp. 239–248. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2012.02.001

17. Ehren M. C. M., Shackleton N. Risk-based school inspections: impact of targeted inspection approaches on Dutch secondary schools. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 2016, vol. 28 (4), pp. 299–321. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-016-9242-0

18. Gunningham N. Being a good inspector: regulatory competence and Australia’s mines inspectorate. Policy and Practice in Health and Safety, 2012, vol. 10 (2), pp. 25–45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14774003.2012.11667775

19. Rachman A., Ratnayake R. M. C. Machine learning approach for risk-based inspection screening assessment. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2019, vol. 185, pp. 518–532. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2019.02.008

20. Eraña-Diaz M. L., Cruz-Chávez M. A., Rivera-López R., Martínez-Bahena B., ávila-Melgar E.Y., Heriberto Cruz-Rosales M. Optimization for risk decision-making through simulated annealing. IEEE Access, 2020, vol. 8, pp. 117063–117079. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3005084

21. Hietikko M., Malm T., Alanen J. Risk estimation studies in the context of a machine control function. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2011, vol. 96 (7), pp. 767–774. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2011.02.009

22. Soloviev А. I. Risk-oriented approach in the system of government control and supervision in the tax sphere. Economy. Taxes. Law, 2017, vol. 10 (6), pp. 139–146. (In Russian) URL: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=32332087

23. Sokolovskaya Z. N., Yatsenko N. V. Applied imitation modelling as an analytical basis for managerial decision making. Business Inform, 2013, no. 6, pp. 69–76. URL: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=20177597

24. Hussein A., Gaber M. M., Elyan E., Jayne C. Imitation learning: A survey of learning methods. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 2017, vol. 50 (2), pp. 1–35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3054912

25. Choudhury S., Bhardwaj M., Arora S., Kapoor A., Ranade G., Scherer S., Dey D. Data-driven planning via imitation learning. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 2018, vol. 37 (13–14), pp. 1632–1672. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0278364918781001

Date of the publication 30.04.2021