Caveat Lector - A Critique of the Current Quality and Qualifications Ireland (QQI) Statutory Quality Assurance Guidelines for Providers of Blended Learning Programmes - 2018

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Đào

Critical reflection on Quality and Qualifications Ireland (QQI) blended learning statutory quality assurance guidelines (2018), written from a Further Education and Training practitioner perspective. The critique examines the contested meaning of “blended learning,” argues that QQI’s definition is misleading, and links the guidelines’ neoliberal language to performativity. It also evaluates how the guidelines address equality of opportunity, situating organizational, programme, and learner-centered responsibilities.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages7

Reading Time18 min

AccessFree to download

Abstract

Purpose and framing of the guidelines

Organisational, programme, and learner contexts

In favour of the guidelines

Critique of definitions and power/interest

Caveat Lector: A Critique of the Current Quality and Qualifications Ireland (QQI) Statutory Quality Assurance Guidelines for Providers of Blended Learning Programmes (2018) gavan sheridan Abstract This is a critical reflection upon the Quality and Qualifications Ireland (2018) guidelines on blended learning from the perspective of a Further Education and Training practitioner. The purpose of the guidelines is set out and it is suggested that there is much to be welcomed here. The contested meaning of the term blended learning is explored and it is noted that the definition proffered by QQIis a false one. It is argued that the neoliberal language of these guidelines is contributing to performativity. Finally, there is comment upon how the guidelines address equality of opportunity. Keywords: Blended Learning, Contested Meaning, Performativity, Diversity Purpose of the Guidelines The Qualifications and Quality Assurance (Education and Training) Act 2012 requires providers to have due regard to the Quality Assurance (QA) guidelines of Quality and Qualifications Ireland (QQI) in the development of programmesand training. Providers developing programmes in the blended learning mode are thus required to have regard to QQI’s Core Statutory Quality Assurance Guidelines (2016) and the QA guidelines on blended learning. The purpose of the guidelines on blended learning is three-fold: to provide ‘guidance to providers on quality assurance and enhancement of blended learning’; to be used by providers ‘when designing, establishing, evaluating, maintaining or reviewing quality assurance procedures for blended learning’; and to be used as the ‘basis for the approval by QQI of a provider’s relevant QA procedures’(QQI, 2018, p.4) . This purpose is then explored in terms of the organisational context, the programme context including development and assessment, and the learner experience context. The focus throughout the guidelines is on recognising issues that are pertinent to blended learning. Within the organisational context, issues include administrative and infrastructural management of information technology, staffing, and compliance with relevant legal or regulatory obligations. The focus of the programme context is upon provider responsibility for ensuring quality in curriculum design, delivery and evaluation. Finally, provider responsibilities towards the learner centre upon support, monitoring progress, and equality of opportunity. In Favour of the Guidelines Accountability in public service when viewed as a tool to support professional work is to be welcomed. Coming to the Further Education and Training (FET) sector from nearly a decade of teaching in secondary schools, the author was surprised at the level of autonomy individual FET teachers had over the delivery and assessment of modules. It was exciting to work with colleagues who had come from industry and were able to talk from real-life perspectives. However, with autonomy came less well-defined accountability than was characteristic of the post-primary sector. The FET sector in Ireland 20 years ago was characterised by a culture of high teacher autonomy that was low in professional guidance. There is much about the QQI guidelines on blended learning to be commended, not least that they exist. The guidelines state that a decision to deliver some provision through blended learning should be a ‘considered one and form part ofa provider’s vision, supported by an approved strategy’(QQI, 2018, p.8) . Thought must be given to appropriate staffing and continuous professional development, and to the provision of fit-for-purpose IT support. It is important that a blended learning approach would entail procedures that clearly demonstrate the ‘need to ensure the value of online learning is enabling learners to meet intended learning outcomes’ (QQI, 2018, p.15) . QQI advises that these guidelines should be read in conjunction with their core policy on QA guidelines, and t

FAQs

What is the central purpose of the QQI blended learning guidelines discussed in the document?

The document explains that the guidelines have a three-fold purpose: guidance on quality assurance and enhancement, use when designing and evaluating QA procedures, and serving as the basis for QQI approval of relevant provider QA procedures.

How does the document assess the meaning of “blended learning”?

It explores that the term is contested and argues QQI’s definition is false, suggesting that prescriptive definitions can constrain the concept’s potential and neuter debate.

What responsibilities does the document highlight across organisational, programme, and learner contexts?

It outlines organisational duties around IT information management, staffing, and legal compliance; programme duties around ensuring quality in curriculum design, delivery, and evaluation; and learner duties focused on support, monitoring progress, and equality of opportunity.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Đào