Students’ and staff perceptions of vocational education institution heads’ virtues
| Published date | 11 October 2019 |
| Date | 11 October 2019 |
| Pages | 1-18 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/QAE-11-2018-0124 |
| Author | Manuel Joaquín Fernández González,Tamāra Pīgozne,Svetlana Surikova,Ļubova Vasečko |
| Subject Matter | Education,Educational evaluation/assessment |
Students’and staffperceptions
of vocational education institution
heads’virtues
Manuel Joaquín Fernández González,Tam
ara Pīgozne,
Svetlana Surikova and Lubova Vase
cko
Scientific Institute of Pedagogy, Latvijas Universitate, Riga, Latvia
Abstract
Purpose –The relevance of institution leaders’personal qualities for providing quality education is widely
recognized. The purpose of this paper is to explore vocational education and training (VET) institution leaders’
character features. The research question was twofold: What are the features of the character of the pedagogical
leaders of three Latvian VET institutions according to students, teachers and institutionboardmembers?What
are the differences between respondents’groups regarding their perceptions of leaders’virtues?
Design/methodology/approach –Six members of the institutionboard, five teachers and six students
participated in structuredqualitative interviews collected in 2013 in three high-qualityVET institutions from
different fields (tourism, sports and maritime education). Secondary analysis of latent content was used to
explorerespondents’perceptions of leaders’virtues, usingsoftware AQUAD 7 for qualitative data analysis.
Findings –The results revealed significant differences between students’and staff (teachers’and
institution board members’) perceptions: the staff members appreciated particularly leaders’performance
virtues (“teamwork orientation”) and intellectual virtues (“critical thinking”), whereas, for students, heads’
moral virtues were more relevant,especially “magnanimity”. Respondents also showed concern about VET
institutionleaders’civic virtues (“neighborliness,”“communityawareness,”and “communicability”).
Practical implications –The results suggest that different perspectives, and in particular students’
voices, should be integrated in VET leaders’assessment process and that their continuing professional
developmentshould also address their intellectual, moral and civic virtues.
Originality/value –This study represents an innovative methodological trial for investigating
educationalinstitution heads’leadership from thelens of virtue ethics.
Keywords Vocational education, Quality evaluation, Pedagogical leadership, Virtue ethics,
Leaders’character, Students’and staff perception
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
The importance of providing qualitative vocationaleducation and training (VET) is widely
recognized (Calder and McCollum, 2013;Lettmayr and Riihimäki, 2011;Molzberger and
Wahle, 2015) because “with the emergence of knowledge and technology driven economies,
there is a huge demand for a highly skilled and technically qualified competent workforce”
(Mitra Debnath and Shankar, 2012, p. 387). In Latvia, the Vocational Education Law[1]
covers three levels of education: vocationalbasic education, vocational secondary education
(four years program) and two levels of professional higher education, namely, first-level
Research financed by the European Regional Development Fund within the post-doctoral project
number 1.1.1.2/VIAA/1/16/071 and by the University of Latvia within the research project “Human,
technologies and quality of education”(2016-2018) conducted at the Faculty of Education, Psychology
and Art.
VET
institution
heads’virtues
1
Received30 November 2018
Revised26 April 2019
18June 2019
12August 2019
9September 2019
Accepted10 September 2019
QualityAssurance in Education
Vol.28 No. 1, 2020
pp. 1-18
© Emerald Publishing Limited
0968-4883
DOI 10.1108/QAE-11-2018-0124
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/0968-4883.htm
delivered in colleges and universities; and second-level in universities[2], [3]. Most of VET
providers in Latvia are governed by the State, but municipalities and private institutions
also provide it. VET institution heads should hold at least a higher education degree in
Education or higher education degree in another fieldand not less than 72 h of pedagogical
education[4].
Latvia faces the challenge of improving VET quality and relevance (Cedefop, 2015;
OECD, 2016a). The numberof VET state institutions decreased from 69 in 2010 to 33 in 2016
(Līce, 2016). In 2013/2014 there were 31,000 students (85 per cent at upper secondary level,
13 per cent in upper-secondary education), 66 VET institutions and colleges and 2,900
teaching staff (in main job), whereas, in 2017/2018 the total VET enrolments accounted for
28,500 in 46 vocational schools and 11 colleges and the teaching staff was 2,768[5]. Similar
challenges can be perceived in other countries. For example, a recent study (Quiggin, 2018)
stated that, in Australia,apprenticeships, traineeships and participation in VET throughthe
State-funded technical and further education (TAFE) system have notably declined, while
less worthy qualifications have proliferated. The number of apprenticeships and
traineeships completions in Australia passed from 214,500 in 2013 to 89,700 in 2018, the
fewest completions since 2001[6]. And a recent report of the Australian Skills Quality
Assurance (ASQA), the mainnational regulator of VET, found that the long-term quality of
Australia’s VET sector is at risk due to unscrupulous provision of short VET training,
leading to loss of confidence in VET (ASQA - Australian Skills Quality Assurance, 2017,
p. 4).
Many effortshave been done in Latvia to makeVET more attractive and to involve social
partners. In 2012/2013, 14 sectoral qualification frameworks were setup and in 2013/2014,
work-based learning pilot-projects were started in six VET institutions. For increasing
attractivenessof VET, a new modular approach was introduced in 2014[7], which enhanced
curriculum flexibility and included alternative assessments of learning outcomes (Cedefop,
2015;Fernández González, 2015). In 2016, a new work-based learning model was initiated,
which includedthe implementation of the EuropeanCredit System for Vocational Education
and Training, motivators for involving entrepreneurs in VET, and a simplified system for
students’contracts at the workplace[8].
Recently, VET reforms in Latvia addressed institution leadership. In 2016, sectoral
expert councils and collegial advisory bodies[9] were established at the top-level of the
managerial structure of the new “Competence Centers of Vocational Education[10]”; and in
January 2017 a national assessment of the leaders of all educational institutions, including
VET[11], was launched, using international indicators of quality education such as “use of
formative assessment,”“student support procedures,”“cooperation with families”,
“attention to diversity”and so on (EQAVET, 2019). However, these reforms of institution
leadership are only partially based on local academic research. Between 2000 and 2013, 28
scientific papers and dissertationswere published in Latvia in the field of school leadership,
but this research is fragmentary (Bluma and Daiktere, 2016;Kalv
ans, 2011) and does not
address the VET field. The methodology used in these studies (document analysis,
statistical analysis of national databases, interviews with principals) rarely considered the
perspective of students, teachersand school administrators. One of these studies (Upenieks,
2002, p. 92) suggested that educational leaders in Latvia should explore further their
temperament and character, but till now, thereare no academic studies reporting students’,
teachers’and institution board members’perceptions of VET institutions heads’character
features in Latviaas a democratic country.
In the context of these recent reforms, the aim of this study was to understand how
institution heads’moral character was perceived at VET institutions of several sizes and
QAE
28,1
2
To continue reading
Request your trial