A conceptual framework for guaranteeing higher education
| Published date | 01 September 2001 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/09684880110399103 |
| Pages | 139-152 |
| Date | 01 September 2001 |
| Author | John J. Lawrence,Michael A. McCollough |
| Subject Matter | Education |
A conceptual
framework for
guaranteeing higher
education
John J. Lawrence and
Michael A. McCollough
In response to growing concerns from
stakeholders about poor or inconsistent
quality, institutions of higher education are
increasingly seeking ways to improve
education quality. Many colleges and
universities have looked to apply lessons from
industry and adopt some type of total quality
management (TQM) system (Hubbard, 1994;
Vazzana et al., 1997). For instance, Northwest
Missouri State University experienced
significant improvements in student
enrollment and academic performance,
faculty recruitment and retention, and
budgetary matters as a result of implementing
a TQM program (Hubbard, 1994).
But many TQM efforts in academia have
been limited to administrative and support
functions, and its extension to teaching
processes has proved to be a major challenge
(Mathews, 1993). Faculty members have had
a difficult time understanding exactly how
TQM principles should be applied in the
classroom (Hubbard, 1994) and are
genuinely concerned about a loss of rigor in
the classroom (Franz, 1998). The high level
of independence historically provided to
faculty also poses a serious challenge to the
implementation of quality programs in higher
education, and some faculty members fear a
centralized adoption of TQM principles in
the classroom as a means for others,
particularly administrators, to dictate what
they must do in the classroom (Bass et al.,
1996). Bass et al. (1996) found that many
colleges that were implementing TQM in
administrative and support functions did not
have plans to extend TQM to the classroom
because of such challenges.
In this paper, we propose a system of
educational guarantees as a way to focus
educators and drive quality improvements.
Such a system ofguarantees offers the potential
to operationalize a TQM culture, facilitate the
adoption of TQM principles in teaching, and
provide a credible signal to external
stakeholders that a college is serious about
quality. Further, the system of guarantees we
propose does not dictate specifically what
faculty must do i n the classroom, l eaving
instructors the autonomy to manage the
classroom in the manner they deem most
appropriate. Our purpose in presenting this
system of guarantees is to stimulate and
encourage debate on the potential use of
service guarantees to bring TQM ideals into
the higher education classroom.
The authors
John J. Lawrence and Michael A. McCollough are both
Associate Professors in the Department of Business at the
University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho, USA.
Keywords
Service, TQM, Education, Quality
Abstract
The lessons of quality management apply to services as
well as tangible goods. Awareness also has been
increasing that services, like tangible goods, can be
guaranteed as a means of implementing a total quality
management (TQM) orientation in the organization. While
higher education has been exploring some of the tenents
of TQM, it has been slow to embrace the power of service
guarantees. In this conceptual article we present a system
of service guarantees designed to foster a TQM
orientation in higher education. We propose that
institutions consider a system of guarantees aimed at
three primary constituent groups ± students, faculty, and
employers ± over the short, medium and long term. The
rationale and implications of the guarantee system are
explored, and possible impediments are discussed.
Electronic access
The research register for this journal is available at
http://www.mcbup.com/research_registers
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is
available at http://www.emerald-library.com/ft
139
Quality Assurance in Education
Volume 9 .Number 3 .2001 .pp. 139±152
#MCB University Press .ISSN 0968-4883
To continue reading
Request your trial