A Study Of Structural Framework Of Institutional Audit Program And Its Implementation Foundation

With the development of the higher education evaluation, it has formed diversified modes of assessment such as institutional assessment, professional accreditation, educational quality audit, and overall ranking. Under the guidance of macro-management policy of higher education, the administrative agencies need to highly value the education quality, to implement classified colleges and universities management and to encourage school educational and management characteristics. Thereupon, it is worth discussing how could education evaluation activities reflect the quality requests of the state, respect for school self-management, and maintain the educational interests of all parties. Different modes have particular targets appropriateness. The diversity of education evaluation object, scope, procedures or other factors will directly affect the results. Therefore, the implementation of classified higher education evaluation and an appropriate mode, will raise schools’activeness, establish cooperative relationship, maintain and improve the higher education quality.Through the literature study of higher education evaluation modes and the status of quality assurance at home and abroad, it reflects that the quality assurance system is the core of institutional audit. The audit mode pays more attention to processes than results, and emphasizes schools’self-management and improvement. Audit mode is propitious to strengthen school characteristics, to protect academic autonomy, and to improve social participation. Its efficiency and flexibility are also widely recognized by domestic and foreign scholars. The combination of conformity assessment and quality audit of institutional evaluation is good for assuring the basic educational qualifications of newly-built institutions, and encouraging qualified institutions to make the most of its advantages. Therefore, the institutional audit program and its implementation foundation are valuable to research.With comprehensive and in-depth comparative study of several key aspects of the institutional audit program such as the audit organization management, audit scope, audit process, and audit follow-up between the United Kingdom and the New Zealand, it demonstrates some same characteristics:particularity of the quality systems, the diversity of social participations, and the transparence of quality information. Besides, the institutional audit of UK pays more attention to the credibility of higher education institutions, the views of students, and quality accountability, while that of the New Zealand emphasizes on academic autonomy, social supervision, and meta-evaluation mechanism.According to the urgent needs of audit mode in the next round of national higher education evaluation, it constructs a framework of our institutional audit program from the following aspects:the audit objectives, organization and management, the audit scope, and the audit procedures, especially highlighting the quality assurance, partnership, school characteristics, and the evaluation process.The implementation of this program needs the coordination between the internal and external quality assurance systems. Policy environment is the basis. Evaluation culture is the condition. And quality assurance is the core. In guiding institutional audit and promoting quality improvements, the systematic standards and institutionalized management of quality assurance of the European Higher Education Area take its place in the front ranks of the world. With the case study of Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area, it shows the great importance of quality policies, the development vision of schools, the qualification of evaluation agencies, and the effectiveness of quality information system; and also offers some proposals of laying solid foundation of institutional audit. They are strengthening the quality policy and quality awareness, improving internal and external quality assurance standards, and establishing the assessment meta-evaluation system of institutional audit.