Does quality work work? A systematic review of academic literature on quality initiatives in higher education

被引:15
作者
Bloch, Carter [1 ]
Degn, Lise [1 ]
Nygaard, Signe [1 ]
Haase, Sanne [2 ]
机构
[1] Aarhus Univ, Dept Polit Sci, Danish Ctr Studies Res & Res Policy, Aarhus, Denmark
[2] VIA Univ Coll, R&D Ctr Qual Educ Profess Policy & Practice, Aarhus, Denmark
关键词
Quality work; higher education; educational quality; quality improvement; STUDENT LEARNING-EXPERIENCE; PROFESSIONAL-DEVELOPMENT; PEER OBSERVATION; DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM; WEB; 2.0; UNIVERSITY; ASSURANCE; FEEDBACK; IMPACT; STAFF;
D O I
10.1080/02602938.2020.1813250
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Quality in higher education is - and has been for many years - at the top of the political agenda. The concept of quality has been explored extensively in the literature as has the means to measure and monitor quality. Connected to these two literatures is a widespread and somewhat fragmented literature on what might initially be termed quality work. This article reviews this literature on quality work in higher education. We characterise the work in this field, its main themes, issues and questions, and discuss what this literature has to say on the effects of quality work. Based on a systematic search for the period 2008-2018, we review 68 publications. The review shows that the literature on quality work can be categorised into three major areas: the role of institutional conditions for quality work, types of quality work practices, and notions of quality and quality outcomes. The review demonstrates that there is a need for more inclusive methodologies and longitudinal studies, particularly more rigorous quantitative analysis of the effects of quality work to supplement other methods.
引用
收藏
页码:701 / 718
页数:18
相关论文
共 69 条
[1]  
Adekola J, 2017, RES LEARN TECHNOL, V25, DOI 10.25304/rlt.v25.1973
[2]  
Almpanis T, 2015, ELECTRON J E-LEARN, V13, P380
[3]   Does the EUA institutional evaluation programme contribute to quality improvement? [J].
Amado Tavares, Diana ;
Joao Rosa, Maria ;
Amaral, Alberto .
QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EDUCATION, 2010, 18 (03) :178-+
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2012, TEACHING DESIGN SCI
[5]   Students as co-creators of teaching approaches, course design, and curricula: implications for academic developers [J].
Bovill, Catherine ;
Cook-Sather, Alison ;
Felten, Peter .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT, 2011, 16 (02) :133-145
[6]   The standards paradox: How quality assurance regimes can subvert teaching and learning in higher education [J].
Brady, Norman ;
Bates, Agnieszka .
EUROPEAN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH JOURNAL, 2016, 15 (02) :155-174
[7]  
BrOgger K., 2020, STATE FEDERAL MARKET
[8]  
Brogger K., 2019, Governing through Standards: The Faceless Masters of Higher Education, DOI [10.1007/978-3-030-00886-4, DOI 10.1007/978-3-030-00886-4]
[9]   Peer development as an alternative to peer observation: a tool to enhance professional development [J].
Byrne, Jenny ;
Brown, Hazel ;
Challen, Doreen .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT, 2010, 15 (03) :215-228
[10]   Enhancing the student learning experience: the perspective of academic staff [J].
Cahill, Jo ;
Turner, Jan ;
Barefoot, Helen .
EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, 2010, 52 (03) :283-295