Symposium Research Brief
Conceptual Framework Draft

From Compliance Assurance to Quality Intelligence

A Scope Transformation Matrix for Higher Education Quality Assurance in the Agentic AI Era

Beyond Automation Human Judgment Quality Culture
Abstract

Argument in Brief

Higher education quality assurance (HEQA) has traditionally been organized around compliance, periodic evaluation, indicator-based accountability, and external review. While these mechanisms remain necessary, they are increasingly insufficient for supporting continuous quality enhancement and quality culture in complex higher education systems. Current discussions of artificial intelligence in HEQA often frame AI as a tool for automating documentation, accelerating review procedures, or simplifying administrative work. This paper argues that the emergence of agentic AI requires a more fundamental reconsideration of the scope of HEQA. Rather than asking whether AI can make existing quality assurance processes more efficient, the paper asks how AI agents may expand what HEQA can observe, connect, monitor, advise, and support.

The paper develops a Scope Transformation Matrix for analyzing agentic AI use cases in HEQA. The matrix distinguishes between AI applications that merely automate compliance work and those that contribute to quality intelligence, risk-informed governance, continuous monitoring, and human-centred advisory support. It further clarifies the boundary between AI-delegable tasks and human-only judgments, emphasizing that values, accountability, peer review, and final quality decisions must remain human-led. By organizing practical use cases across actors such as teachers, departments, institutions, and QA agencies, the paper offers a conceptual tool for HEQA researchers to examine how agentic AI may support quality culture without reducing quality to datafication or algorithmic control.

The central question is not whether AI can do QA, but which QA tasks can be delegated, which judgments must remain human, and how this boundary reshapes quality culture.
Framework

Scope Transformation Matrix

Dimension Guiding Question
Actor Who uses or is affected by the AI agent?
QA Function What quality assurance work is supported?
AI Role Does AI summarize, detect, connect, recommend, or monitor?
Human Judgment Boundary What must remain human-led?
Scope Transformation Does the use case expand evidence, time, participation, intervention, or advisory capacity?
Quality Intelligence Level Is the output descriptive, diagnostic, predictive, or advisory?
Governance Risk What risks must be governed?
Practical Path

Use-Case Ladder

Level Use Case Main Contribution
1 Course alignment agent Supports teachers in aligning outcomes, assessment, and feedback.
2 Program review agent Helps departments sustain evidence-based program improvement.
3 Institutional research agent Integrates fragmented data into institutional quality intelligence.
4 Risk-informed QA agent Supports early detection of quality risks and improvement priorities.
5 Always-on advisory QA infrastructure Provides continuous human-centred quality support across the institution.
Keywords

Search Terms and Positioning

Higher education quality assurance Agentic AI Quality intelligence Quality culture AI governance Compliance assurance Quality enhancement