Different academics' characteristics, different perceptions on quality assessment?
| Date | 25 January 2013 |
| Published date | 25 January 2013 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/09684881311293089 |
| Pages | 96-117 |
| Author | Sónia Cardoso,Maria João Rosa,Cristina S. Santos |
| Subject Matter | Education |
Different academics’
characteristics, different
perceptions on quality
assessment?
So
´nia Cardoso
CIPES – Centre for Research in Higher Education Policies, Matosinhos,
Portugal, and A3ES – Higher Education Assessment and Accreditation
Agency, Matosinhos, Portugal
Maria Joa
˜o Rosa
CIPES – Centre for Research in Higher Education Policies, Matosinhos,
Portugal, and DEGEI, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal, and
Cristina S. Santos
CIPES – Centre for Research in Higher Education Policies,
Matosinhos, Portugal
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 (n¼36,215). 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.
Keywords Higher education,Quality assessment, Academic staff,Portugal, Quality assurance
Paper type Research paper
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0968-4883.htm
This research was supported by a grant from the Fundac¸a
˜o para a Cie
ˆncia e Tecnologia under
the framework of the project Perceptions of Higher Education Institutions and Academics to
Assessment and Accreditation (PTDC/ESC/6884/2006).
QAE
21,1
96
Received 26 March 2012
Revised 24 April 2012
Accepted 5 October 2012
Quality Assurance in Education
Vol. 21 No. 1, 2013
pp. 96-117
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0968-4883
DOI 10.1108/09684881311293089
Introduction
Over the last years, in Western European higher education, the emerging role of the
market, the diffusion of the rhetoric of new public management and the loss of trust in
institutions and academic professionals has led to a movement from less intrusive
forms of quality assurance to accreditation (Amaral and Rosa, 2011).
In Portugal, this is evident when we analyse the “history” of quality assurance and
its two major phases (Rosa and Sarrico, 2012). The first one (1993-2005) is marked by
the existence of an umbrella organisation – the Higher Education Assessment
National Council – coordinating the national quality system and cooperating with
entities representing higher ed ucation institutions (HEIs) ( public and private
universities and polytechnics), which were responsible for the study programmes’
assessment, mainly oriented to quality improvement. The second phase, initiated in
2006 under the influence of European developments (namely, the Bologna Declaration
and the compliance with the Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the
European Higher Education Area – ESG), is characterised by the establishment of a
system of study cycles’ and institutions’ assessment and accreditation (Law 38/2007)
and of a new and independent body for its coordination – the Higher Education
Assessment and Accreditation Agency. Within this new system, operating since 2009,
accreditation assumes a preponderant role as a way of assuring that study cycles and
institutions accomplish minimum requirements leading to their official recognition.
Assuming that academics’ support for quality assurance (namely regarding its core
values, goals, purposes and methods) is essential to its successful implementation and
a factor influencing the accuracy and meaningfulness of the results achieved
(Laughton, 2003), this paper discusses the receptivity of Portuguese academics
towards quality assessment objectives and purposes, in general, and to the recently
established assessment and accreditation system’s priorities and parameters, in
particular. The aim is to explore if academics’ perceptions within this field translate
into more resistant or more supportive positions.
Furthermore, one intends to see if these perceptions are homogeneous, i.e. shared by
all academics, or if they differ according to some academics’ characteristics, such as
gender, disciplinary affiliation, type of institution and experience in quality assurance
activities, as referred to in some studies (Morley, 2005; Kleijnen et al., 2011;
Papadimitriou et al., 2008; Rosa et al., 2006; Stensaker et al., 2011; Veiga et al., 2012).
Though this paper and, especially, its empirical part, addresses the academics’
perceptions of quality assessment, we often resort to studies on quality assurance to
both theoretically and empirically support our analysis. Quality assurance frequently
encapsulates quality assessment as one of its phases, and thus studies on quality
assurance are relevant to our analysis.
Academics resistance and support to quality assurance
The perspectives, attitudes and positions of academics towards quality assurance still
constitute a relatively underdeveloped subject in the research devoted to this
mechanism of State regulation (Lomas, 2007; Nasser and Fresko, 2002; Newton, 2000;
Westerheijden et al., 2007). Nevertheless, it is possible to argue that academics’
positions tend to translate into different degrees of acceptance, support and adaptation
to the quality assurance idea, policies and implementation procedures (Cartwright,
2007; Newton, 2002; Watty, 2006; Westerheijden et al., 2007).
Different
academics’
characteristics
97
To continue reading
Request your trial