Abstract:
Purpose: This study is an outcome of a preliminary review forming a part of a broader
research project that examines how quality assurance practices have been
institutionalized in the Sri Lankan higher education field and how they impact
accountability and governance within public sector universities. This preliminary
review was mainly concerned with identifying the institutional challenges that have
been highlighted in the literature connected to the institutionalization of quality
assurance practices in the higher education field in Sri Lanka.
Design/methodology/approach: The study was conducted as a desk review. The
review was performed using Sri Lanka’s quality assurance literature and documents,
which included regulations and guidelines issued by various government authorities
governing Sri Lanka’s higher education institutions since 2000.
Findings: Findings suggest that quality assurance (QA) is evolving into a distinct
institutional field of practice within the higher education sector in Sri Lanka with
coercive, normative, and mimetic isomorphic pressures. Coercive pressures operate
mainly in the form of regulatory measures by the University Grants Commission
(UGC) and the Quality Assurance Council (QAC), which have prescribed formal
quality assurance frameworks that universities need to comply with in institutional
and program reviews. Normative isomorphism is prompted by peer review
mechanisms and training and awareness campaigns by the UGC, QAC, and various
other donor-driven projects. Mimetic forces operate in the form of the adoption of
benchmarking practices against successful universities and courses. The literature,
however, suggests that the process of embedding quality assurance practices varies
across universities; while some universities embrace QA as a mechanism for
continuous improvement, others tend to view it as an external imposition. University
actors tend to view QA practices as a bureaucratic requirement and, thus, an additional
administrative burden rather than an opportunity for improving actual performance
and accountability. Research limitations/implications: The findings are informed by a review of extant
literature and documents. Though it provides us with a grounding for theoretically
informed dialogue and detailed empirical investigation, the empirical evidence may,
however, challenge these initial findings. The variation in QA practice also highlights
the need to examine human agency and how it is shaped by extant structures and
power dynamics.
Originality/value: Though a body of literature that examines the QA practices in
higher education institutions in Sri Lanka has emerged, these works have not been
investigated in light of the institutionalization of QA as a practice. Such insight is
important for policymakers to implement measures to embed the QA practice so that
it reproduces its existence over time.
