Session Information
11 SES 06 A, Quality of Higher Education Institutions
Paper Session
Contribution
The design of new university degrees and the establishment of requirements and quality criteria that lead these degrees to achieve an official bachelor's or master's degree status is one of the main developments that have occurred with the publication of R.D. 1393/2007, of October 29 (modified by R.D. 861/2010, of July 2) (García & Guzmán, 2016). The degrees have to go through different phases, starting with a previous accreditation process (Verification), which together with a positive report from the corresponding Autonomous Community Quality Assessment Agency allows its implementation. From this moment on, the quality assessment agencies have to carry out a periodic monitoring of the compliance of the project contained in the verified syllabus (Accreditation). The main objectives are to verify its adequate implementation, identify possible deviations from the verified syllabus for subsequent correction and analyze the results attained after the implementation. In this respect, the internal quality assessment system is a key element in terms of control of compliance with the verified syllabus and continuous improvement (Pozo, 2010; Muñoz & Pozo, 2014; Álvarez et al., 2019).
The purpose of these processes is to ensure the quality of the educational programs offered, to guarantee the achievement of the expected learning outcomes and to confirm the availability and accessibility of valid, reliable and relevant public information to assist in decision making. In addition, recommendations must be provided to facilitate the internal processes of program quality improvement.
The so-called Internal Quality Assurance Systems (IQAS) (Ibáñez et al., 2020), must therefore promote organizational improvement, for which it is essential to be linked to the management processes of university institutions. Thus, it is possible to substantially affect the learning processes, considering both the diversity and the contextualized analysis of plans, programs, centers and individuals (Paricio, 2012). The quality policy system of the institutions performs the function to achieve a high degree of satisfaction of all stakeholders (internal and external) by ensuring that the skills and competences of its graduates are recognized by employers and society in general (Rico & Sánchez, 2015).
Improvement is always a causal hypothesis that needs to be empirically verified (Valverde, 2014). Evaluation of the changes originated by the project contained in the verified syllabus allows understanding the changes originated, trying to reveal whether it is possible to identify the effect of its implementation and to what degree the extent of that effect can be attributed to it or to other reasons (Sarasola et al., 2015). Such impact assessment requires the passage of time -since the implementation of processes such Accreditation- to verify the permanence and consistency of the changes achieved. In addition, evaluation of the implementation of accreditation systems allows to assess the effectiveness, efficiency and validity of the intervention carried out, being an interesting strategy for the detection of needs.
The main objective of this study is to analyze the level of improvement that the implementation of the accreditation systems has in the undergraduate degrees, specifically in relation to the Organization and Management (Classrooms and Special Spaces, ICT Resources and Services, Student Support and Orientation Service, Mobility Programs and External Internships and Web Page). In addition, we seek to examine the existence of differences in each of the areas according to the different audiences that make up the study sample. This work is part of the Research Project with Reference PR75/18-21592, whose general objective is to study the impact and effects of accreditation systems in university institutions.
Method
To achieve the study’s aim, a quantitative, non-experimental, descriptive and comparative analysis was conducted. An instrument of 25 items designed ad hoc (with a Likert scale of 0 to 4 points) was applied to collect data. The questionnaire gathered data on the opinion of the different college audiences (Dean’s team, quality coordinator, professors and students) on the impact of university undergraduate degrees accreditation systems. The areas of interest were Organization and Management. The internal consistency of the questionnaire reached an excellent level (Cronbach's α=0.942). The instrument was applied between October and December 2021 to a sample of 605 subjects from the Complutense University of Madrid (Spain), by means of non-probabilistic incidental sampling. A total of 27.5% of the subjects belong to the Biology degree, 30.1% to the Nursing degree and the remaining 42.7% to the Primary school Teacher degree. A total of 89.8% of the participants were fourth-year students of the aforementioned degrees and 5% were teachers. These audiences completed the instrument in person in their own classrooms and under the supervision of a member of the research group. The rest of the subjects in the sample (4.2% of Deans and Vice-Deans and 1% of those in positions of responsibility for quality) completed the instrument online. Data analysis was carried out using the IBM SPSS statistical package (version 25). First, a descriptive study was carried out (both of the test as a whole and of each of the 25 items comprising it). Next, the application of ANOVA made it possible to compare the scores on each item among the 4 audiences (students, professors, members of the dean's team and quality coordinators), making the pertinent post hoc comparisons by applying the Scheffé test (all with a confidence level of 99%).
Expected Outcomes
Overall the average achieved was 35.43 (S.D.= 29.26), on a scale of 0-100 points. This result shows that the different participants’ perception on the impact of the Accreditation Systems on the area of Organization and Management is medium-low. The average scores of the items (on a scale of 0 to 4) were also low showing averages between 0.93 (in the case of Administrative Services for Students) and 2.06 points (in the case of the quality of the library lending service). The most highly valued aspects were: The library services facilities and advice on bibliographic searches in databases (with averages of 1.94 and 1.73, respectively). Other aspects, such as the coordination between the students’ support services and the availability of guides and tutorials plans for students’ showed averages of 1.06 and 1.12 respectively. The analyses carried out according to the analyzed college audiences (students, professor, dean’s team and quality coordinator) showed significant differences among them in 17 of the 25 analyzed items. Thus, the sub-dimensions related to Student Support and Guidance Services (4 items), Mobility and Internship Programs (3 items) and Web Page (8 items) were rated significantly in different ways by the different audiences. In general, students showed significantly lower ratings (with averages close to 1), compared to those of the members of the dean's team and those responsible for quality (with averages around 2 in almost all cases). There were no significant differences between the ratings of professors, the dean's team and those responsible for quality.
References
Álvarez, P. R. et al. (2019). La guía docente en la planificación y desarrollo de la enseñanza universitaria. Revista Electrónica de Investigación y Docencia (REID), 7(24), 7-24. https://doi.org/10.17561/reid.n21.1 García, E. y Guzmán, F. (2016). La acreditación de títulos universitarios oficiales en el ámbito de Ciencias de la Educación: Una cuestión de alfabetización académica. Educación XX1, 19(2), 19-43. https://doi.org/10.5944/educxx1.16451 Ibáñez, F.J. et al. (2020). Evaluación y acreditación de titulaciones universitarias en Educación desde el punto de vista del profesorado. Revista Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, 34(95), 137-154. https://doi.org/10.47553/rifop.v34i3.81380 Muñoz, J. M. y Pozo, C. (2014). El escenario de la calidad en la Universidad española: de dónde venimos y hacia dónde vamos. Revista Electrónica Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, 17(3), 1-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/reifop.17.3. 204011 Paricio, J. (2012). Diez principios para un sistema de gestión de la calidad concebido específicamente para la coordinación y la mejora interna de las titulaciones universitarias. REDU. Revista de Docencia Universitaria, 10(3), 49-69. https://doi.org/10.4995/redu.2012.6014 Pozo, C. (2010). El seguimiento de los títulos oficiales de grado. El papel fundamental de los sistemas de garantía de calidad para la futura acreditación. XXI: Revista de Educación, 12, 81-105. http://hdl.handle.net/11162/24757 R.D. 1393/2007, de 29 de octubre, por el que se establece la ordenación de las enseñanzas universitarias oficiales. https://www.boe.es/eli/es/rd/2007/10/29/1393/con R.D. 861/2010, de 2 de julio, por el que se modifica el R.D 1393/2007, de 29 de octubre. https://www.boe.es/eli/es/rd/2010/07/02/861 Rico, M. y Sánchez, H. (2015). Diseño del Sistema de Garantía Interno de Calidad y Acreditación de títulos en ingenierías específicas. Revista Tecnológica ESPOL –RTE, 28(5), 90-104. http://www.rte.espol.edu.ec/index.php/tecnologica/article/view/427/294 Sarasola, M. et al. (2015). El impacto de la implementación del sistema de calidad educativa PCI a través de la perspectiva del profesorado. Páginas de Educación, 8(2), 277-296. http://www.scielo.edu.uy/pdf/pe/v8n2/v8n2a05.pdf Valverde, G. A. (2014). Educational quality: global politics, comparative inquiry, and opportunities to learn. Comparative Education Review, 58(4), 575-589. https://doi.org/10.1086/678038
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.