Autonomy is linked to quality.

After more than half a decade of implementation, this work has created significant momentum in the higher education system, laying the foundation for a gradually developing culture of quality. The network of quality accreditation organizations has expanded, the team of accreditors has been strengthened; and the internal quality assurance (IQA) system has been formed with a clear organizational structure, linked to the mission, vision, and strategic goals of each institution.

The establishment of specialized quality assurance units, the issuance of quality policies, and the transparent disclosure of training information, learning outcomes, and student employment rates contribute to enhanced social accountability. Notably, self-assessment activities are becoming increasingly systematic and rigorous, serving as a tool for measuring and reflecting quality rather than merely fulfilling procedural requirements. Following external evaluations, most educational institutions seriously accept recommendations and implement substantive improvement solutions.

Despite the achievements, limitations remain, as the actual operational efficiency of the internal quality assurance system has not met expectations. Major bottlenecks include personnel issues, a shortage of specialized staff, and limitations in data management and the application of information technology.

In particular, quality improvement and benchmarking activities – which are the pillars of IQA – still have many limitations. The capacity to analyze and utilize external evaluation results in some schools is weak, and they have not yet formed long-term improvement strategies. The development and implementation of post-accreditation improvement plans are sometimes superficial, lacking monitoring mechanisms, progressing slowly, and the ability for continuous improvement is weak... In addition, administrative procedures and other objective factors continue to be obstacles.

One of the key reasons why internal quality assurance systems in many higher education institutions have not been fully effective stems from limited financial resources. This is coupled with inadequate human resources; systemic issues and coordination mechanisms still exist. These three factors intertwine, creating a "double bottleneck" that both hinders the effective operation of IQA and impedes the process of continuous improvement and international integration.

In practice, the link between university autonomy and quality assurance is a key factor for the system to operate effectively and sustainably. The requirements include detailed guidelines on autonomy linked to internal quality assurance systems; clear regulations on funding for quality assurance; and supportive policies during the digital transformation and international integration phases.

Furthermore, digitalization and data sharing are crucial elements in transforming the quality assurance system from a document-based system to a truly operational one. Enhancing the capacity of personnel working in quality assurance is a key prerequisite for the IQA system to operate effectively, transparently, and sustainably.

Recently, the amended Law on Higher Education was officially passed, opening a new chapter for quality assurance in higher education. The relatively comprehensive legalization of quality assurance provisions not only resolves many obstacles but also lays the foundation for a shift towards substantive quality governance.

When autonomy is firmly anchored by accountability and a culture of quality is nurtured from within, higher education institutions have more room for sustainable development, improved quality, and a stronger position within the national and regional education system.

Source: https://giaoducthoidai.vn/tu-chu-gan-voi-chat-luong-post765655.html