University Actors Responding to the National Quality Assurance Regime for Higher Education in Malawi: A Case of Instrumentality, Pragmatism and Symbolic Compliance

IF 2.8 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Wanangwa W. N. Chikazinga
{"title":"University Actors Responding to the National Quality Assurance Regime for Higher Education in Malawi: A Case of Instrumentality, Pragmatism and Symbolic Compliance","authors":"Wanangwa W. N. Chikazinga","doi":"10.1111/hequ.12577","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>The literature shows that the question of how to integrate quality assurance into higher education institutions is associated with several obstacles including non-support from university actors. This study explored the university actors' response to the recently implemented external quality assurance and accreditation regime for higher education in Malawi. The findings showed that university actors respond to external quality assurance in divergent ways, mainly characterised by formal instrumentality, professional pragmatism and symbolic compliance. This meant that it would be naïve for external quality assurance agencies to assume that when university actors participate in external accreditation processes, it means that they embrace external quality assurance as a mechanism for enhancing quality. The implication was that national policy makers and quality assurance agencies should not consider university actors as ‘passive recipients’ that mutely accept quality assurance reforms, but rather seriously attend to them as both ‘makers’ and ‘shapers’ of policy in order to develop quality assurance systems that can be genuinely embraced. The study contributes to research that take a critical perspective in interpreting university personnel response to quality assurance.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51607,"journal":{"name":"HIGHER EDUCATION QUARTERLY","volume":"79 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HIGHER EDUCATION QUARTERLY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hequ.12577","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The literature shows that the question of how to integrate quality assurance into higher education institutions is associated with several obstacles including non-support from university actors. This study explored the university actors' response to the recently implemented external quality assurance and accreditation regime for higher education in Malawi. The findings showed that university actors respond to external quality assurance in divergent ways, mainly characterised by formal instrumentality, professional pragmatism and symbolic compliance. This meant that it would be naïve for external quality assurance agencies to assume that when university actors participate in external accreditation processes, it means that they embrace external quality assurance as a mechanism for enhancing quality. The implication was that national policy makers and quality assurance agencies should not consider university actors as ‘passive recipients’ that mutely accept quality assurance reforms, but rather seriously attend to them as both ‘makers’ and ‘shapers’ of policy in order to develop quality assurance systems that can be genuinely embraced. The study contributes to research that take a critical perspective in interpreting university personnel response to quality assurance.

大学行为者对马拉维高等教育国家质量保证制度的回应:工具性、实用主义和象征性遵守的案例
文献表明,如何将质量保证纳入高等教育机构的问题与几个障碍有关,包括大学行为者的不支持。这项研究探讨了大学行为者对马拉维最近实施的高等教育外部质量保证和认证制度的反应。研究结果表明,大学行为者对外部质量保证的反应方式不同,主要表现为形式工具性、专业实用主义和象征性遵从性。这意味着对于外部质量保证机构来说,当大学参与者参与外部认证过程时,这意味着他们将外部质量保证作为一种提高质量的机制。这意味着,国家政策制定者和质量保证机构不应该把大学行为者视为沉默地接受质量保证改革的“被动接受者”,而应该认真地把它们视为政策的“制定者”和“塑造者”,以便发展出可以真正接受的质量保证体系。该研究有助于从批判性的角度解释大学人员对质量保证的反应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
HIGHER EDUCATION QUARTERLY
HIGHER EDUCATION QUARTERLY EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
9.10%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Higher Education Quarterly publishes articles concerned with policy, strategic management and ideas in higher education. A substantial part of its contents is concerned with reporting research findings in ways that bring out their relevance to senior managers and policy makers at institutional and national levels, and to academics who are not necessarily specialists in the academic study of higher education. Higher Education Quarterly also publishes papers that are not based on empirical research but give thoughtful academic analyses of significant policy, management or academic issues.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信