Developing alternative perspectives for quality in higher education

Abstract

Suggests the quality in higher education (HE) debate is currently narrowly focussed, essentially around adapting industrial quality systems. Traditionally, the notion of academic freedom was seen as the requirement of excellence in education. In more recent times (pre 1990) measures of quality control were imposed on HE, but their adoption was superficial compared to industry. The post 1990 period saw the need for a considerable increase in the quality systems activity in HE, in view of the dynamism in the sector. The adoption of quality management (QM) was preferred, because of its extensive practice in industry. Presently, its practice in HE is deteriorating into managerialism in institutions, because of lack of development of a shared vision and lack of a match between QM techniques and educational processes. Proposes a new approach to quality systems in HE. QM can still be the broad management methodology but should be adapted to educational processes and be made to preserve the traditional values of academic freedom and collegial modes of operation.

Quality and quality assurance in Ethiopian higher education

“…This goes in line with the arguments by different authors that quality of student learning is maintained through a professional commitment and engagement (e.g. Barnett, 1992;Harvey and Knight, 1996;Wilger, 1999;Srikanthan and Dalrymple, 2003;Dill, 2006;Harvey and Newton, 2007;etc.). In this regard, a blend of the collegial or managerial-internal and facilitative-external quality assurance approaches suggested by Luckett (2006) seems to be appropriate for a viable quality assurance system.…”

“…These models have been applied in quite a large number of higher education systems in the US and many European countries such as the United Kingdom (Williams, 1993;Temple, 2005). However, the relevance and fitness of these models to higher education has been one of the areas of vigorous debate in the academic circles and, as Srikanthan and Dalrymple (2003) noted, there is still no agreement on a model for quality in higher education. The debate mainly dwells around the nature and aspects of higher education; service and education.…”

“…Horsburgh (1999) also argued that the focus of quality should, in such a rapidly changing world, be on the attributes of graduates, where the transformation of the learner is central. In this regard, Srikanthan and Dalrymple (2003) argued that it is the view of quality as "transformation" of the participants that is capable of addressing the concerns of all the stakeholders' group.…”

“…As Williams (1993) noted, the occurrence of quality management approaches in higher education is a product of the market ideologies of the 1980s and the managerialism that accompanied it. During this time, management of quality was made central to the new discourse on governance of higher education institutions (Srikanthan and Dalrymple, 2003). Many higher education institutions adopted the quality management models originated in the world of business and industrial production such as TQM, ISO9001, EFQM and BPR since 1980s.…”

The Quest for Quality Science Education Experiences in Tanzanian Secondary Schools

“…Instead, Srikanthan and Dalrymple (2003) suggest taking a developmental approach to quality as pragmatists articulate. This developmental approach would exist in the form of multi-involvement practices, whereby policy makers and planners, educators, communities, parents, teachers, students and other stakeholders in educational decisions are involved in a strategy for creating relevance, ownership and accountability for their children's education (Delputte, 2013).…”