Sparking interdisciplinarity: let’s take framing students as customers in higher education seriously

Abstract

This paper aims to inspire an interdisciplinary dialogue on framing students as customers in higher education, by reviewing some under-explored conceptual issues and implications in the existing literature especially concerning presently underrepresented disciplines. It sets out a different case for studying a student-consumer metaphor to that which has dominated the debate so far, and thus a new research agenda calling for interdisciplinary research. It cautions future research on the necessity to reflect on the particular context and nature of higher education before conceptualizing students as customers, with particular attention to be paid to wider implications and consequences of changing higher education context to our society and future.

Quality Service Provision and Students Satisfaction at Akenten Aooiah-menka University of Skills Training and Entrepreneurial Development: Implications for University management

“…In particular, they are intangible activities, benefits, or pleasures that universities provide to customers in exchange for valuable benefits or pleasures. The present study supports authors such as Guilbault (2018) and Ma (2020) who regard students as primary consumers of higher education service. The primary goal of higher education is to provide academic and non-academic services to students.…”

“…The quality of the institution's services and the satisfaction of its stakeholders are the foundations of its competitive strength and advantage. Positive service quality perceptions can lead to student satisfaction, and satisfied students may attract new students by engaging in positive word-of-mouth communication with acquaintances and friends, as well as returning to the university to take additional courses and training programs (Guilbault, 2018;Ma, 2020;Weerasinghe & Fernando, 2018). To put it in another way, the level of quality and quality of services provided to customers, which include all quality entities in the form of product quality and service, have a significant impact on a higher institution's ability to meet customer needs.…”

Well‐being of higher education consumers: A review and research agenda

“…Higher education institutes have come under pressure to ensure that students not only enrol with them but also finish their degrees (Daddow et al., 2020). The ascendance of market mechanisms in higher education has substantially necessitated a consumer mindset for handling students (Ma, 2020; Naidoo & Whitty, 2013). For engaging in this intense competition for students, higher education institutions need to differentiate themselves through positioning statements, state‐of‐the‐art infrastructure and external accreditations (Nixon et al., 2018; Scullion & Molesworth, 2016).…”

“…Higher education institutes have come under pressure to ensure that students not only enrol with them but also finish their degrees (Daddow et al, 2020). The ascendance of market mechanisms in higher education has substantially necessitated a consumer mindset for handling students (Ma, 2020;Naidoo & Whitty, 2013).…”

Potential for Chemistry in Multidisciplinary, Interdisciplinary, and Transdisciplinary Teaching Activities in Higher Education

“…Integrative learning involves combining subject matter traditionally taught as separate curricula. This approach enables students to connect with and to apply theoretical/practical knowledge and skills developed in various settings (e.g., lecture theaters, tutorials, laboratories, and potentially industrial settings). ,,,,− This approach benefits from problem-, question-, and theme-based integrative learning experiences in a thoughtfully structured MITT curriculum with a number of core courses that include interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary concepts, methods, and theories. ,,,,, The development and delivery of coherent, effective, and strongly MITT curricula offer a variety of challenges to higher education establishments. ,,,,,,,− The most obvious barriers to the development and delivery of MITT curricula are organizational, particularly the traditional structures of university departments and faculties and their teaching and training programs, which tend to be focused on the necessity to guarantee standards of training and to secure externally recognized accreditation for the program of study. , A direct consequence of this structure is that staff may not be encouraged to venture away from the safe ground of their disciplinary borders, which is mirrored by the historical scope of journals, and peer-review models for research grants and outputs (books, conference proceedings, papers, reports, etc.). Other challenges include leadership (ideation, communication, championing change), management (change management, financial and human resource allocation for course development, staff support and training (e.g., practice sharing events)), administration (timetabling, credit-/finance-sharing between departments, etc.…”