Stakeholders in Higher Education Quality Assurance: Richness in Diversity?

Beerkens, Maarja; Udam, Maiki

doi:10.1057/s41307-016-0032-6

Cited by 56 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Study shows that 36% or 81 model schools were supported by the Regional Government as a partner in providing qualified services. Local Government discipline, the local office of Education, is not in line with the results of Berkeens and Udam research [27], that explains that the role of government is needed in quality assurance, especially in its authority as a policy maker and regulation.…”

Section: • Involvement Of School Citizens and Stakeholdersmentioning

confidence: 96%

The Implementation of Primary and Secondary Education Quality Assurance Systems

Kinesti¹

2019

Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Education Innovation (ICEI 2019)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The School Model Program has been implemented for three years since 2016 so that in the third year (2018) there needs to be a formative evaluation of program implementation so that achievements and difficulties can be identified during the implementation of the program so that necessary improvements can be made. This formative evaluative study used survey approach to measure the achievement of the implementation of internal quality assurance sistem cycle by model schools and quality culture in the area of school. The respondents were 228 taken from 228 model schools. The survey results were analyzed statistically using descriptive analysis by describing the achievements of each sub-indicator of the instrument. The results showed that the model school had implemented the entire all Internal Quality Assurance System cycle. Quality culture in the model schools are namely independence, commitment and cooperation of TPMPS and school community members in providing quality services to customers. The school has the support of stakeholders and the community. Keywords-the primary and secondary education quality; assurance system model; model school3rd International Conference on Education Innovation (ICEI 2019)

show abstract

Section: • Involvement Of School Citizens and Stakeholdersmentioning

confidence: 96%

The Implementation of Primary and Secondary Education Quality Assurance Systems

Kinesti¹

2019

Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Education Innovation (ICEI 2019)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The groups are latent, expectant and definitive stakeholders (Mitchell et. al., 1997), internal and external (Burrows, 1999;Melewar & Akel, 2005;Beerkens & Udam, 2017), based on their participation (Reed, 2008), relational priorities and strategies , primary and secondary (Maric, 2013), overt and latent (Jongbloed, Enders & Salerno, 2008;Garvare & Johansson, 2010;Mainardes, Alves & Raposo, 2013). The various categories of stakeholders means that HEIs need to synergize their roles and interests to create value for their stakeholders (Labanauskis & Ginevičius, 2017).…”

Section: Stakeholder Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some studies on higher education stakeholders emphasize the aspects of the expectation and the role of parties involved in institutional activities (Beerkens & Udam, 2017;Stensaker & Vabø, 2013;Diamond, 2008;. There is also other research relating to university stakeholder's management (Chapleo & Sims, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Responsibility of Higher Education Institutions: A New Insight into Stakeholders

Rumambi

Kaparang

Lintong

et al. 2019

Global J. Bus. Soc. Sci. Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective - Are stakeholders within the institution as actors, or are they also the goals of the institution's social responsibility? This study aims to provide new insight into the role of stakeholders in the implementation of social responsibility in Higher Education Institutions (HEI). Institutions have a certain level of social responsibility, which is inherent to its existence. To exist, an institution relies on the presence of stakeholders. Stakeholders are considered as the key to an institution's legitimacy. The relationship between an institution and its stakeholders can be described as a social contract. Methodology/Technique – Using a qualitative approach, this study identifies the relevant stakeholders in HEI’s and categorizes their roles and interests. The concept of HEI social dimension is used to analyze and interpret the data. The results indicate that HEI stakeholders consist of three levels, namely: primary (including management, lecturers, students, administrative staff, security officers, technicians, cleaning services, and the natural environment of the institution), secondary (including the local community, industries, alumni organizations, the government, accreditation agency, and the natural environment around the institution), and tertiary level (including society in general and nature). Finding & Novelty - The results suggest that the primary stakeholders become moral actors who carry out the institution's commitment to implement social responsibility. This finding implies that primary stakeholders become the executor and the goal of HEI social responsibility. Therefore, the institution's social responsibilities activities are aimed at the life and development of the institution itself. Social responsibility is carried out from the inside to the outside in a circular and continuous manner. Type of Paper: Empirical. Keywords: Social Responsibility; Higher Education Institution; Stakeholders; Social Dimension of HEI. Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Rumambi, H. D; Kaparang, R. M; Lintong J. S; Tangon, J.N; O, Johanis. 2019. Social Responsibility of Higher Education Institutions: A New Insight into Stakeholders, Global J. Bus. Soc. Sci. Review 7 (3): 185 – 193. https://doi.org/10.35609/gjbssr.2019.7.3(3) JEL Classification: M13, M14, M19.

show abstract

“…One may hypothesise that stakeholders' views differ because their 'stake' is different but also they have different type of expertise and the level of knowledge. The few studies examining stakeholder expectations confirm that external and internal stakeholders differ in their expectations to quality assurance (Beerkens & Udam, 2015). Internal stakeholders (academics and university leaders) seem to lean more towards the ideas of improvement and enhancement in a quality assurance system .…”

Section: Stakeholder Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Questions related to the purpose of the system, its effectiveness and costs emerge regularly and the search for the most satisfying quality assurance system is ongoing. Expectations of a quality assurance system change over time and they tend to vary among different stakeholders (Beerkens & Udam, 2015). Quality assurance evolves in a complex political environment where different types of factors interact: for example, factors specific to the sector, such as expectations to higher education; broader trends in governance and public management that shape discussions about accountability and the role of stakeholders; and the organisational structure created for quality assurance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality assurance in the political context: in the midst of different expectations and conflicting goals

Beerkens

2015

Quality in Higher Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Higher education quality assurance systems develop within a complex political environment where national level goals and priorities interact with European and global developments. Furthermore, quality assurance is influenced by broader processes in the public sector that set expectations with respect to accountability, legitimacy and regulatory quality. As a result, quality assurance systems often face different and even conflicting goals from different parts of society. The traditional goals of securing minimum standards and facilitating improvement within universities are augmented with such goals as providing information to the public, supporting inter-institutional competition and positioning institutions or higher education systems in the global competition. The relative priority of these goals is in a constant change over time. This paper aims to map the main tensions that emerge from the conflicting demands and discusses the extent to which impact evaluation can address some of the difficulties.

show abstract

Stakeholders in Higher Education Quality Assurance: Richness in Diversity?

Cited by 56 publications

References 35 publications

The Implementation of Primary and Secondary Education Quality Assurance Systems

The Implementation of Primary and Secondary Education Quality Assurance Systems

Social Responsibility of Higher Education Institutions: A New Insight into Stakeholders

Quality assurance in the political context: in the midst of different expectations and conflicting goals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About