**6. Study methods**

**Figure 3.** An unstable QA framework—least attention to Programme.

34 Global Voices in Higher Education

**Figure 4.** An unstable QA framework—least attention to People.

Investigating the quality assurance frameworks implemented by Ghanaian universities followed a qualitative approach because of the subjective views about quality in Ghana [36]. Adopting a case‐study design [37], a purposive sampling technique was used to select three quality assurance officers from three flagship Ghanaian public universities whose quality assurance policies and practices are believed to have had a greater influence on other higher education institutions in Ghana. This made it more likely that information gathered from the quality assurance officers would be information rich [38]. As part of pre‐interview arrange‐ ments, the officers were given information sheets. These noted the nature and purpose of the study and the benefits they stood to gain from participating. They were also informed that participation in the research was voluntary and that they were free to opt out at any time. The key informants were interviewed in‐depth for approximately 1 hour. The inter‐ view interaction was fluid rather than rigid [39] but was shaped by the key question linked to the objectives of the study. The question was "What do quality assurance frameworks of higher education institutions in Ghana give the least attention to, and why?" During the data collection, the question was divided into two—the first part focused on collecting data on what receives attention in the quality assurance frameworks and the second part concen‐ trated on what receives the least attention and why? Through in‐depth interviews, the par‐ ticipants shared their quality assurance ideas and how these ideas were put into practice. The interviews were audiotaped to enhance accuracy. Data from the in‐depth interviews were transcribed. Additional data were also obtained from institutional documents such as quality assurance activity reports and policies. These were coded and thematically analysed with the assistance of Nvivo 10 software. Preliminary themes were clustered into groups of themes [40]. Data from the interviews were corroborated and augmented with evidence from docu‐ ments to enhance the credibility of the findings [41, 42]. Due to ethical considerations, confi‐ dentiality and anonymity of the respondents and the universities they work in were assured by assigning aliases to their names and their institutions [43, 44]. The major themes which the data were coded into were people, programme, and place.

The sub‐themes present under people were internal stakeholders and external stakeholders who were involved in quality assurance practices of the universities. Programmes sub‐themes were leadership and management practices, teaching and learning activities, student assess‐ ment, curriculum, professional development activities, research, staff recruitment, student admissions, and student support services. Place sub‐themes were space, teaching/learning infrastructure, research infrastructure, and social amenities. These themes and sub‐themes are presented and discussed below.
