WILLEMSTAD - In a recent assessment, it has been projected that the University of Curaçao will require a substantial four-year timeframe to successfully complete an Institutional Quality Assurance Review (IQAR). The university's situation has been deemed critical due to issues stemming from administrative concerns, declining student enrollments, financial difficulties, and a vulnerable quality assurance system. These factors collectively threaten the university's continued existence, as highlighted by a specialized panel that conducted an initial evaluation and subsequently provided crucial advice to the institution.
The IQAR serves as an evaluation mechanism aimed at determining whether an educational institution possesses a robust quality culture and quality assurance system, adequately ensuring that the education provided aligns with both national and international standards.
The Netherlands-Flemish Accreditation Organization (NVAO) is an autonomous entity responsible for the accreditation and evaluation of higher education establishments and programs in the Netherlands and Flanders.
Institutional Evaluation
While the University of Curaçao has nearly twenty years of experience with program assessments conducted by the NVAO, it has yet to undergo an Institutional Quality Assurance Review (IQAR). The university had initially planned to initiate the first IQAR evaluation with the NVAO during the academic year 2024/2025. However, subsequent to the preliminary assessment, it has become evident that achieving this goal within the stipulated timeframe may not be feasible.
The panel that conducted the initial assessment was internally assembled by the university itself. Comprising experts working independently from the institution, the panel holds authority at an administrative level, boasting higher education expertise, auditing skills, and an understanding of the design and effectiveness of quality assurance systems.
Assessment and Findings
Concurrently with the Board of Trustees, the assessment panel concludes that the university's sustained viability necessitates significant and immediate reforms. However, an absence of urgency and recognition within the university environment hampers the implementation of crucial improvements.
Challenges in the institutional leadership are attributed to various factors. Collaborative dynamics between the rector magnificus and deans exhibit friction, particularly with the rector's pivotal role. Such conflicts are partially rooted in conflict-avoidant behavior. Deans tend to focus predominantly on their respective faculties rather than the broader university scope.
Transparency gaps, unmet agreements, and withheld documentation contribute to a lack of engagement across all levels of the institution. This deficiency extends to participation bodies such as the faculty council, staff council, and student council. Their limited connectivity hampers collaborative efforts between the institution, faculties, and programs, hindering their capacity to effectively ensure educational quality and institutional governance.
Cultivating a Culture of Fear
Based on discussions, the panel identifies an entrenched culture of fear within the university. Individuals hesitate to vocalize concerns they encounter, apprehensive about potential repercussions from upper management. This sense of unease is not limited to faculty and staff but also extends to students who, too, feel constrained in expressing their views. The panel attributes this culture of fear to the absence of transparency, as certain documents and information remain inaccessible.
Prioritization and the Way Forward
In terms of prioritization, the panel identifies deficiencies both in educational matters (institution, faculty, and program) and within supporting services. The strategic plan lacks prioritization, annual plans suffer from the same deficiency, and long-term planning is virtually absent. Moreover, financial alignment between the institution, faculties, programs, and planning is lacking. As a result, many initiatives are commenced but left partially or entirely unexecuted. The panel deems it paramount for the institution to provide relevant information for effective steering despite the plethora of policy documents.
Over recent years, the university has witnessed a decline in new student enrollments, which subsequently impacts its financial stability. This dip is attributed, in part, to a less favorable image of the university. Factors influencing this image include adverse publicity, limited facilities, an aging campus, and the perception that education in the Netherlands offers superior quality, according to parental views.
The panel's overall consensus underscores the urgency for the University of Curaçao to address key areas such as 'institutional governance,' 'prioritization,' 'image,' and 'collaboration.' This targeted approach, the panel contends, is instrumental in achieving operational efficiency and robustness necessary to uphold educational quality, attract students, and tackle financial complexities.
Implications and Challenges
A potentially unfavorable evaluation of the Institutional Quality Assurance Review could entail serious ramifications for the University of Curaçao. Possible consequences encompass a negative accreditation verdict, potentially rendering the institution ineligible to offer specific programs or confer accreditations.
Moreover, withdrawal of existing accreditations could transpire, invalidating the value of students' diplomas, particularly on an international level. Furthermore, an insufficient assessment could tarnish the university's public standing and erode trust among students, parents, and stakeholders alike.