Chapter 1 : Introduction
Higher education is a powerful tool to build knowledge-based society of the 21st century as it is fundamental important of the country (Mishra,2016). Higher education is generally understood to cover teaching, research and extension. As they are on the working class, the higher education system will affect the scientific, technological advancement and economic growth of a country. Browne (2017) positioned that due to its ability to help formulate good decision making in every sphere of modern society, in businesses, education, politics and science, higher education is considered as one of the most essential factors in influencing societal changes. Henard (2009) mentioned that higher education has became a major driver of economic competitiveness in an increasingly knowledge-driven global economy which improve employment skills calls for quality teaching within educational institutions. Society is increasingly concerned about the quality programmes as higher education systems grow and diversify.
Green and Harvey (1993) explored that quality is relative in two ways which is first, quality is in the eye of the beholder. It is important to stress that different stakeholders can differing views on the quality of higher education although this may seem trivial. Harvey and Knight (1996) found that students and staff emphasise the quality of the student experience, employers particularly find employability important and governments focus on quality as a means of control. Second, quality is relative to the standard one maintains. One could argue that quality is absolute by equating quality with beauty or truth (Harvey and Green, 1993). Or else, quality can only be meaningful if measured against a benchmark. The five conceptions of quality was constructed by Harvey (2007) :
- Quality as exceptional: quality is exclusive, unique, distinctive, self-evident, quality is achieved when implicit standards are surpassed;
- Quality as fitness for purpose: quality is inclusive, measured against the objective or purpose, hence a focus on effectiveness (either from the perspective of the service provider or those at the receiving end: students, employers);
- Quality as value for money: quality is value-based, with a focus on efficiency; quality explicit being connected to accountability;
- Quality as perfection or consistency: quality is exclusive, process-focused and based on specifications being met perfectly and characterised by notions of no faults and getting the things right first time;
- Quality as transformation: a focus on qualitative value-added change and improvement, but difficult to measure against predetermined benchmarks or standards.
Taking these two elements together, the five conceptions that was offered have been used to clarify objectives or rationales of quality.
On the other hand, the Centre for Higher Education Governance Ghent (CHEGG) (2013) proposed that the project funded by ERASMUS+ called “Sustainable Quality Enhancement in Higher Education Learning and Teaching” (SQELT) aims to develop a comprehensive and integrative model of performance data management (PDM) for leaning and teaching in higher education institutions. A core ingredient of such a model is a set of key data and performance indicators for learning and teaching. They claimed that the project was aim to conduct an extensive literature review in order to identify the key conceptual perspectives on quality (in higher education) and the most important factors that determine quality in higher education. These factors will be analysed at three levels; the system level, the organisational level, and the teaching and learning level (students, teacher and the curriculum).
For many years, the improvements of the education systems in their respective countries have been proposed by the governments and legislation have been successively implemented to that end. It is necessary to emphasise the concern for quality in education amongst these policy initiatives. The organic law for quality education was born with the primary objective of improving the quality if the education system (LOCE, 2002). LOMCE (2013) stated that years later, quality is still the main objective in the more recent education legislation which also sets out quality as a critical aim and stresses the fact that only a high quality education system can guarantee the equality of opportunity and progress in the merits of democracy. Equity and quality go hand in hand. Moreover, quality education is considered a constituent element in the right education in the more recent law.
Promoting quality in education has been the priority in the vast majority of countries worldwide and it has been conceived as a philosophical and instrumental vehicle that intervenes in social transformation on a global level. The improvement is associated with accountability as enhancing quality in education has become one of the objectives of the European Commission in 2001, in the case of Europe along with the improvement of teacher training and education. The European Commission provided aid that has been given in form of subsidies which have financed various projects with the aim of supporting accountability and teacher training. Kelly (2004) stated that these grants have identified quality indicators which contribute to improve the operations of the education system with special attention being paid to teacher training and language teaching (CEF,2001).
The definition of quality teaching depends on the meaning of “quality”, Biggs (2001) pointed that “quality” can be defined as an outcome, a property, or a process which is a multi-layered and complex word. Therefore, it is hardly surprising that the phrase “quality teaching” has been given several definitions. Tam (2001) found that all stakeholders held their own view of what quality in educations means to them. Some scholar define quality in higher education as the process of quality enhancement. Has (1996) argues that quality in higher education, and quality teaching in particular, springs from a never-ending process of reduction and elimination of defects. As an outcome, the definitions of quality in higher education is a property or a process are not necessarily in conflict, and can potentially be used by higher education institutions as complementary. The review does not adopt one definitions of quality teaching instead to look into how the institutions have defined quality as a result.
Chapter 2 : Factors that Impact in Higher Education
In a competitive environment, generally it is vital for service organisations to have a proper understanding of determinants and backgrounds of consumer’s satisfaction as to have an extremely high monetary value. Organisations need to focus more on perceived service quality determinants for the reason that perceived service quality is an antecedent to customer satisfaction by Lassar (2000). Service is like a beauty; it means that service quality has different meanings for different people which is a person-dependent. Russel (2005) reveals that the important goal for higher education institutions is delivering perceived service quality to students which may lead to generate much desired additional income. On the other hand, Oldfield and Baron (2000) state that in order to deliver a high quality and satisfying student, higher education institutions need to focus more on what student want instead of gathering data based on what institutions consider their students regard as important.
Based on the studies by McNeil and Soutar (1996), the non-academic dimensions and academic dimensions are two kinds of dimensions for students perceived service quality. Furthermore, Athiyaman (1997) explore that there are other dimensions of student perceived service quality which are the level of curriculum, leisure facilities, library facilities, computing facilities, availability of academic personnel and the quality of teaching. Hence, there are 14 dimensions that have been proposed to measure student perceived service quality which induce library facilities, housing services, travel agency, occupation services, advisory services, university bookshop, health services, financial assistance and involvement of students in course contents and work expertise by Hill (1995). According to Aldridge and Rowley (1998), the failure and success of students in every higher educational institution is related to the level of satisfaction and dissatisfaction due to the high tendency in believing that higher educational quality brings higher learning chances.
In the area of higher education, the adoption of quality control has been superficial and diluted by the exercise of academic freedom (Lagrosen, 2004). It is usually difficult to apply the features of quality to higher education considering the fact that quality requires teamwork (Boaden, 1992). Institutions want to be recognised as providers of good quality higher education. They understand that competing on the basis of research only is not sufficient to ensure the reputation of the university.
2.1 Quality Teaching
According to (Mishra, 2016), quality teaching involved a broad range of quality factors that are grouped under three major heading:
Institution-wide and quality assurance policies which include global projects designed to develop a quality culture at institutional level, like policy design and support organisation and internal quality assurance systems.
Programme monitoring that include actions to measure the design, content and delivery of the programmes.
Teaching and learning support including initiatives targeting teachers, students and work environment.
To make the quality teaching at the top of leadership level and at departmental level calls for leaders and staff to identify benchmarks, promote good practices and scale them up across departments, and think up effective support that meets student expectations, an institutional commitment is needed (Henard, 2009). A quality teaching frameworks allows the institution to monitor support, track teacher and student satisfaction, and study the impact on the learning process. Henard also claims that close monitoring of quality teaching support has been necessary to encourage broad endorsement within the academic community, avoiding the risk of attracting only the most motivated teachers. Hence, to improve the teaching and learning process, a flexible institutional framework, a higher level of teacher autonomy and a collaborative relationship with students and staff are all conductive (Fabrice, 2009).
The implications for institutional actors of an engagement in quality teaching:
Table 1 : Implications for institutional actors of an engagement in quality teaching
Table 1 shows the actors and the implementations of an engagement in quality teaching.
Fabrice (2009) mentioned about the concept of ‘quality teaching’which is complex and open to a range of definitions and interpretations. This review has therefore adopted a pragmatic approach, based on how institutions define quality in their own circumstances. To introduce an effective institutional policy for the quality of teaching involves harnessing synergy between two groups of factors:
At the national and in many cases international levels, factors external to institutions: they work as facilitators or catalysts, fostering a general climate conductive t the recognition of teaching quality as a priority.
Internal institutional factors which is the institutional context and specific circumstances are likely affect the pace of development of quality teaching initiatives. There are overlapping layers across institutions which are more or less open to quality teaching initiatives and whose influence varies over time.
Henard explored the quality teaching initiatives have emphasised the role of teaching in the educational transformative process, have refined the interaction between research and teaching, and the culture of quality within the academic community have nurtured. However, the innovative evaluative approaches need to develop by the institutions in order to measure the impact of their support on quality teaching. The higher education sector is still struggling to understand the casual link between the engagement in teaching and the quality of learning outcomes. The awareness of the responsibility of teachers in the learning process and justifies the institutional need of reeling them to fulfil their mission usually generated by the support for quality of teaching.
On the other hand, Pors (2001) mention that the quality of teaching can be measured using student’s perceptions of the different dimensions of teaching space experience. If the instructors know about aspects and criteria which are directly connected to the professional development of a lecturer, the teaching quality can be increased (Louden 2000). In universities, teaching staff should be considered as it have the main role in the largest positive effect on student satisfaction. Hill (2003) state that it is important to consider the quality of the instructor which include lecture delivery, feedback to students during the meeting and on projects, and the connection with students in the classroom. This is one of the important factors for students related to teaching quality.
2.2 Curriculum
In educational institutions, the curriculum has been considered as academic program given to students which also have dimension in various articles known as subject content, program issues, academic concerns and course content. The appropriateness of educational programs and course content and the number of courses provided as well as the range to which the objectives of the educational programs are described to the students have linked to curriculum (Nguyen, 1997). In addition, Tessema and Ready (2012) find that courses in universities are usually grouped under the diverse classifications which include college primary courses, university-wide prescriptions, essential courses and electives in major.