Does internal quality management contribute to more control or to improvement of higher education?

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore faculty's perceptions of quality management activities (QMA) within their departments, attention being paid to relevant quality aspects and whether quality management contributes to control or improvement of higher education. Furthermore, it examines differences between departments and relationships between the different variables. Design/methodology/approach A questionnaire containing items with Likert‐type answer scales was distributed to faculty ( n =266) of 18 departments of universities of applied sciences in the Netherlands: 16 items dealt with QMA, 17 with attention paid to relevant quality aspects and ten with the perceived effects. Findings Faculty were neutral about the degree to which sufficient QMA were conducted within their departments. They were positive about the attention paid to relevant quality aspects. Furthermore, they were positive about the effects in terms of improvement and negative about the effects in terms of control. Significant differences were found between departments. Finally, positive correlations were found between management activities, attention being paid to quality aspects and the perceived effect in terms of improvement. Research limitations/implications The main limitation of this study is that only faculty's perceptions were measured, thus it is not clear whether these QMA really result in improvement in educational practice. Practical implications Departments paying little attention to quality aspects and with few QMA could really benefit from further increasing their quality management efforts. Originality/value Quality management is often seen as mainly contributing to control and managerialism. This study demonstrates that according to faculty, quality management is influencing improvement positively.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 65 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.