Different academics' characteristics, different perceptions on quality assessment?

Abstract

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to explore Portuguese academics' perceptions on higher education quality assessment objectives and purposes, in general, and on the recently implemented system for higher education quality assessment and accreditation, in particular. It aims to discuss the differences of those perceptions dependent on some academics' characteristics, such as: gender, disciplinary affiliation, type of higher education institution and experience in quality assurance activities. Design/methodology/approach -An online questionnaire with Likert-type answer scales was distributed to the Portuguese academic population (n ¼ 36,215). In total, 962 answers were collected from academics belonging to the public higher education system. Data were treated resorting to descriptive statistics, hypothesis tests and analysis of variance. Findings -Portuguese academics tend to support the majority of goals and purposes quality assessment may have, as well as the main features of the newly designed quality assessment and accreditation system. Nevertheless they tend to support more quality assessment mechanisms privileging improvement over control. This support is slightly more evident among female academics, academics from public polytechnic institutions, from medical and health sciences and with former experience in quality assurance activities. Originality/value -The study adds to the discussion on academics' perceptions on quality assurance, highlighting the influence played at this level by some of their characteristics. It is especially relevant for those working either in higher education institutions or governmental agencies, since it may contribute to the design of quality assurance systems academics are more likely to support.

Why is quality in higher education not achieved? The view of academics

“…employment status, position in the career, performance of management roles and geographic location of their institutions) are pertinent to explain academics' perceptions on quality assurance (see Cardoso, Rosa, and Santos 2013), they were not considered for the present analysis. Given the relative lack of research on the obstacles to quality as envisaged by academics, it was considered more important to take an exploratory and comprehensive approach to the topic.…”

“…Given that much of quality assurance has been a matter for policy makers, quality assurance agencies, institutional managers and quality professionals, it is of interest to analyse what academics think are the main obstacles to quality, especially since there is evidence suggesting that the impact of quality assurance is dependent on academics buying into the process (Westerheijden, Hulpiau, and Waeytens 2007). Hence, academics' support is essential for any successful improvement activity and a crucial factor influencing the accuracy and meaningfulness of the results achieved (Cardoso, Rosa, and Santos 2013;Laughton 2003).…”

“…The same can be said of what academics think about current quality assurance schemes. Nonetheless, there are some studies discussing academics' positions on this topic, including those which analyse the causes potentially interfering with academics' support for or resistance to quality assurance, such as the analysis developed by Cardoso, Rosa, and Santos (2013) Laughton 2003;Lomas 2007;Newton 2002;Salter and Tapper 2000;Stensaker et al 2011;Watty 2006). Resistance was found to be due to different reasons, including academics' perceptions that quality assurance: is an imposition and prescription; has a highly bureaucratic character; is not aligned with the 'academic endeavour'; has unintended consequences on personal and organisational behaviour; promotes inspection, regulation and standardisation; relates more to monitoring and control and less to enhancement and transformation; grasps the 'academic world' through the language and ideology of managerialism; and is based on procedures that are not entirely reliable and capable of addressing the 'essence' of the educational process, inducing improvements.…”

The importance and degree of implementation of the European standards and guidelines for internal quality assurance in universities: the views of Portuguese academics

“…One of the main groups of actors in these quality management systems -the academics -can adopt different standpoints, which, in practice, tend to translate into different degrees of acceptance, support and adaptation to the quality management idea, policies and implementation procedures (Cardoso, Rosa, & Santos, 2013;Cartwright, 2007;Newton, 2002;Westerheijden, Hulpiau, & Waeytens, 2007). Academics seem to show growing acceptance of quality management, with a positive perception of its introduction, specifically in the case of Portugal (Cardoso et al, 2013;.…”

“…An investigation is made into academics' perceptions of the importance of these standards for quality management as well as their degree of implementation in their institutions. As academics are not a uniform group, and as previous studies have shown that different groups of academics hold different perceptions of quality assessment (Cardoso et al, 2013), we will also analyse how different groups differ in their perceptions of the importance and degree of implementation of the standards.…”