Academics’ participation in quality assurance: does it reflect ownership?

Perceptions about accreditation and quality management in Higher Education. Development of a Spanish-language questionnaire with a sample of academics from a private university

“…(Salazar, 2008). The fact that there is a weak correlation between this factor and the others in the questionnaire may be due to what was reported by Cardoso et al (2018), regarding the cognitive and experiential distance in the students, towards the actions of quality in the University. As was mentioned in the theoretical framework, in the words of Lemaitre (2019), it remains a pending task how to meaningfully involve students in quality activities.…”

“…This is consistent with a weak correlation observed between the value of the internal quality unit and other factors. A potential influencing factor for our finding may be that, while its official function is the promotion of quality, its creation concentrated central responsibilities associated with the quality in the organization, leaving a lesser sense of ownership in academics (Cardoso et al, 2018).…”

“…The second approach consists of studies focusing on assessing the students' perceptions (Cardoso, 2009;Volkwein, Lattuca, Harper, & Domingo, 2007). Finally, the third perspective stems from studies that focused on evaluating the perceptions of managers and academics about these issues (Cardoso et al, 2013;Cardoso et al, 2015;Cardoso et al, 2018;Gregorutti & Bon, 2012;Newton, 2002;Trullen & Rodríguez, 2013).…”

“…The need to clarify the effects of quality systems on educational institutions, in terms of empirical evidence of perceptions and attitudes about accreditation is increasingly relevant (Cardoso, Rosa, & Santos, 2013;Cardoso, Rosa, & Stensaker, 2015). The study of opinions and attitudes of academics regarding quality assurance/ management in university education has gradually gained recognition as a field of research in itself (Larrauri, Espinosa, Rosario Muñoz, & Lechosa, 2012), and has experienced significant development during recent decades in countries like the United Kingdom, US (Larrauri et al, 2012), Portugal (Cardoso, 2009;Cardoso et al, 2013;Cardoso et al, 2015;Cardoso, Rosa, & Videira, 2018) and Chile (IPSOS, 2010b;Lemaitre, Maturana, Zenteno, & Alvarado, 2012;Zapata & Torre, 2012).…”

Shared misunderstandings? Competing and conflicting meaning structures in quality assurance

“…Leaving it at that has its own dangers, however, as Laske et al (2000) have found, the less quality notions are defined the more they run the risk of becoming a tool for safeguarding and enforcing (political) interests. Correspondingly, Newton (2002Newton ( , 2007 has shown, more than a decade ago, how academics resent quality assurance as a purely bureaucratic practice that impedes their activities, yet even more recent research shows that the idea of academics' ownership of quality assurance is still not working out (Cardoso et al, 2018).…”