Fernando F. Padro

Critical quality indicators of higher education

This study explores the weakest total quality management dimensions and defines the critical quality indicators for Taiwanese universities using a hybrid model using importance–performance analysis (IPA) and a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP). IPA and FAHP are measured using the average value, while the FAHP is also measured using a five-point linguistic variable scale. Consistent with the literature, R&D, innovation, human resource, and knowledge management are weak quality dimensions requiring attention. However, different from contemporary research, leadership, the development of customers and markets, process management, and quality information regarding operations were not identified as weakest quality dimensions.

Course Substitution Practices, Policies, and Implications for Students with Disabilities.

Data from 65 colleges and universities across the United State were used to study course substitution practices for postsecondary students with disabilities. Data indicate that the majority of surveyed institutions (90.8%) allow course substitutions, yet only 50% had written policies directing substitution decisions. At responding institutions (N = 65), foreign language and math are the most common courses requested for substitution. In addition, at surveyed institutions, students with learning disabilities are more likely than other students with disabilities to request and be offered substitutions. These findings are discussed in regard to §504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, subsequent legislation, and two key cases, Southeastern Community College v. Davis (1979) and Guckenberger et al. v. Boston University (1998).

Student feedback in the US and global contexts

Abstract: Today’s accountability processes for university performance require the use of student feedback for an increasing number of aspects of what universities do. This has to be done in a systematic way and made part of an institution’s decision-making process. The challenge to the use of student feedback is the purpose behind the collection and analysis of this information. External stakeholders prefer the use of a customer-focused model in which what universities do is defined as a service. Academic staff and supporters of academe prefer an approach that recognises the traditional norms of academic performance. This chapter discusses the controversies, dilemmas and issues of using student feedback from the lens of evaluating the performance of academic units and staff in the USA, where the practice of generating student ratings is a long-standing one and where many of the concerns regarding the use of student feedback were initially raised.

A leadership model for higher education quality

Abstract: This chapter presents a possible approach for leaders in higher education quality based on typical demands faced by many universities today. The narrative identifies the course of action a university takes from the point of view of leadership brought by the CEO, senior administrators, faculty governance, key faculty leaders, and the rank-and-file members of the faculty. Traditionally, higher education has recognised the perspectives and approaches from the accountability and assessment movements. Ideas and notions from the field of quality are less accepted and, actually, seen more in terms of a fad. However, the quality framework is here to stay as reflected by what external standards in auditing and/or accreditation procedures reflect and represent. This is a discussion of the benefits for university leaders to adopt a quality framework as a means of not only coping with, but succeeding in maintaining institutional agility and autonomy in an age of uncertainty brought about by constant change.

ACODE Benchmarks for technology enhanced learning (TEL): findings from a 24 university benchmarking exercise regarding the benchmarks’ fitness for purpose

Purpose: This discussion presents findings from 24 higher education institutions (HEIs), recommendations regarding the benchmarks themselves and for university practice, potential expansion of the benchmark methodology to provide more capacity to create and use data to evidence student learning in a technology enhanced learning (TEL) environment. Design/Methodology/Approach: These are preliminary results of a major benchmarking activity that is designed to be part of a continuing program that is still under review. Results are provided through frequency distribution and illustrative qualitative information gleaned from two surveys provided participants, one during the collaborative session between participants from the 24 HEIs and nine months later. An analysis of the data in the form of recommendations is also provided. Findings: Findings specific to participating HEIs are not shared due to confidentiality. The most important conclusion were the interest and usefulness of the benchmarks for participating HEIs, especially the sharing of information between HEIs. Findings led to 6 recommendations: [1] minor revisions to the benchmarks are needed, [2] to formally endorse the ACODE Benchmarks, [3] not pursue the merger of benchmarks 7 and 8 or 5 and 6 at this time due to insufficient evidence, [4] that ACODE agree to facilitate a formal benchmarking activity every second year, [5] create a series of online tools and a collaboration space to facilitate inter-institutional knowledge of institutional practice with a capacity to maintain confidentiality, and [6] the online collaborative space have an area to allow institutions to share good practice examples that align with the performance indicators. Practical Implications: Firstly, Australia’s Tertiary Education Quality & Standards Agency (TEQSA) is expanding the use of benchmarking activities at HEIs as part of their quality assurance practice to meet regulatory compliance requirements. The use of the ACODE Benchmarks facilitates therefore assists HEIs meet their regulatory compliance obligations. Secondly, Originality/value: ACODE is one of the few international agencies focusing on TEL benchmarks, criteria, guidelines or standards. A number of the participating HEIs are considered leading practitioners of learning and teaching in TEL and thus they not only inform but help shape the values and inform QA agencies of appropriate practice that should be embedded within the standards and/or practices that generate recognition of HEI practice.

Higher education: the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few

Universities and private higher education providers are usually at loggerheads about the quality of the qualifications, the impact that the scope of regulatory compliance has on institutional autonomy, and the cost of doing business. The argument stems from the basic notion that universities are the ivory towers of knowledge, and no other group has the ability to achieve such outcomes. The chapter discusses the growing demand for higher education in society, the recognition of students that private providers do provide a service that has positive outcomes, and the future of education is based on a collaborative model or a symbiotic union of universities with private higher education providers.

16 – Accreditation and institutional learning: the impact interactions based on a minimaxing strategy have on the benefits from external reviews

This chapter is a personal epistemology of the potential limitations on the organizational learning that universities can actually achieve through external review processes. The goal is to engender a discussion of institutional learning from the perspective of risk and of how an understanding of the potential limitations can enhance the capacity for learning. The chapter begins with a description of the perceptual and structural challenges to institutional learning emanating from external review processes, which can help to explain the hurdles that have to be overcome in designing and implementing internal and external quality assurance processes. This is followed by a discussion of the nature of learning, of when learning happens, the limitations on organizational learning, and the institutional mechanisms and values that impact on the potential for learning vis-a-vis acceptance of the appropriateness of external demands for and the basis of accountability.