The academic voice in English and Czech higher education quality
| Published date | 24 April 2009 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/09684880910951363 |
| Pages | 140-155 |
| Date | 24 April 2009 |
| Author | Patricie Mertova,Len Webster |
| Subject Matter | Education |
The academic voice in English
and Czech higher education
quality
Patricie Mertova
Faculty of Law, Centre for Higher Education Quality (CHEQ),
Monash University, Melbourne, Australia, and
Len Webster
Centre for the Advancement of Learning and Teaching, Monash University,
Melbourne, Australia
Abstract
Purpose – This paper sets out to report on a research project investigating the academic voice in
higher education quality in the UK and the Czech Republic. It aims to describe the origins and reasons
for introducing quality monitoring and assurance into higher education, showing the differences and
impacts on higher education quality in England and the Czech Republic, including the current
practices and presenting the concerns and issues voiced by the academics and higher education
leaders in both higher education systems.
Design/methodology/approach – The research utilised a critical event narrative inquiry method,
which focuses on issues of complexity and human-centredness in studied phenomena. In this way the
method addresses issues that are frequently overlooked by quantitative research methods. It is argued
that, by extracting “critical events,” the method is more efficient in dealing with large amounts of data,
which often result from the use of qualitative research methods. In the presented research, “critical
events” voicing important issues and concerns in higher education quality are extracted from stories of
UK and Czech academics and higher education leaders.
Findings – Through extracting “critical events” in the professional practice of academics and higher
education leaders, the research uncovered some similar and some culture-specific issues voiced by
Czech and UK academics and higher education leaders. The culture-specific issues were revealed
mainly in the Czech higher education context.
Practical implications – The research uncovered a number of issues and concerns which were
overlooked in the current higher education quality practices in both the higher education systems.
The paper does not present all the recommendations for educational practice and further research.
These may be consulted in Mertova’s Quality in Higher Education: Stories of English and Czech
Academics and Higher Education Leader.
Originality/value – The research applied a critical event narrative inquiry methodology, which is a
novel qualitative research method focusing on extracting “critical events” in the professional practice
of individuals, in this case academics and higher education leaders. Even though the methodology was
developed by Webster and Mertova, the study has further refined it and applied it in the field of higher
education quality.
Keywords Higher education,Quality, Academic staff, England, CzechRepublic
Paper type Research paper
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0968-4883.htm
This paper was written as part of the Monash University Postgraduate Publishing Grant. The
first author would like to thank the anonymous academics and higher education leaders who
agreed to participate in the research.
QAE
17,2
140
Quality Assurance in Education
Vol. 17 No. 2, 2009
pp. 140-155
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0968-4883
DOI 10.1108/09684880910951363
Glossary of acronyms
ACSA Academic Centre for Student Activities, Czech Republic.
CEE Central and Eastern European.
CHES Centre for Higher Education Studies, Czech Republic.
CNAA Council for National Academic Awards, UK.
DETYA Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs, Australia.
EFQM European Framework for Quality Management (excellence model).
EUA European University Association.
HEA Higher Education Academy, UK.
HMI Her Majesty’s Inspectorate, UK.
HEFCE Higher Education Funding Council for England, UK.
OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
QAA Quality Assurance Agency, UK.
RAE Research Assessment Exercise, UK.
UGC University Grants Committee, UK.
Introduction
The subject of quality has been a pervasive issue on the agenda in higher education
around the world for nearly two decades. A greater focus on quality in higher
education resulted from a range of competing factors, among the most prominent were:
political control over higher education (exerted particularly by national governments),
the growth in the number of students in higher education (including general changes in
the student population and their expectations), and financial control on the part of
national governments (frequently interacting with the previous two factors). Quality
monitoring has become a mechanism for governments worldwide to tackle these
competing factors but, at the same time, it can be argued that it was frequently
employed to disguise the dominant focus on accountability, rather than enhancement,
in higher education (Barnett, 1992; Harvey and Green, 1993; Morley, 2003; Lomas, 2000;
Harvey, 2004, 2005).
It can be argued that a lot of the trends in higher education quality have been
management-driven, underpinned by a desire to develop a range of mechanisms of
control (Lomas, 2000; Jones, 2003). However, human-centred aspects, which play a
crucial role in most areas of higher education, have been largely missing in quality
mechanisms employed in higher education. Furthermore, the management-driven
mechanisms and systems were frequently found unsuitable or only partly suitable for
the higher education sector, due to their disregard for the nature of higher education
and its employees, in particular the academics (Birnbaum, 2000; Green, 1994). Indeed,
the academic voice has been missing from any quality mechanisms and systems
employed in higher education.
These issues have been felt particularly strongly in the Anglo-Saxon world,
represented by countries such as UK and Australia. There have been several studies
which highlighted the significance of the academic voice in the area of higher education
quality, such as McInnis et al. (1995), Newton (2001), Lomas (2007), and Cartwright
(2007). The need for a greater attention to the academic voice in the area of higher
education quality and also for further research on the academic voice in higher education
quality was recently identified, for instance by Lomas (2007) and Cartwright (2007).
Academic voice
in higher
education quality
141
To continue reading
Request your trial