Quality in administration of higher education Professor Jussi Kivistö Professor Elias Pekkola

Report: A short ‘desk research’ prepared at the request of SUHF to address the existing knowledge gap regarding quality in administration of higher education institutions Objective: To enhance understanding for the development of administrative quality and quality assurance in higher education institutions Nature: Generic and conceptual analysis, not a ‘catalogue’ of technical advices  

Quality and quality assurance in Higher education administration Scholarly contributions (theorizing) are practically non-existent Empirical research is scarce and very narrowly focused External & internal quality assurance do not (often) recognize it as a distinct area of HEI processes, tasks and work However, having well functioning administration is presumably considered to be important everywhere…

….. OR IS IT THE ROOT of ALL EVIL? The Guardian, 21 Aug 2017 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/21/universities-broke-cut-pointless-admin-teaching

Administration and Quality

Administrative tasks

Categorisation of administrative functions

Aspects of administrative service in higher education

Dimensions of administrative quality

Quality assurance FOR administration 12/31/2018

DIMENSIONS of quality assurance for administration

Contents Objectives Purpose   Contents Objectives Purpose Action plans, quality assurance guidelines and manuals Binding documents containing descriptions on e.g. overall architecture of the quality assurance, division, overall objectives, policies and procedures related to quality assurance. To describe the quality assurance system as a whole and set guidelines how it works. Accountability, improvement Administrative audits, assessments, evaluations and reviews Self-evaluation, external assessment (site visit of external/peer reviewers), final report and recommendations. To assess whether quality assurance procedures are adequate, being carried out effectively vis-à-vis the own objectives of the institution. Audit aims to look to the system for achieving good quality, but not at the quality itself. Improvement Feedback surveys Periodic surveys for the users of administrative services (academic staff, other administrative staff, students, external stakeholders). To monitor and measure service users’ subjective experiences and satisfaction. Accountability (Improvement) Statistical data and performance indicators Quantifiable data on financial and human resources: cost measures, measures related to use of facilities and equipment, staff characteristics, service outputs. Measuring performance can include ratios and indices. To increase transparency, comparability, and objectivity. Benchmarking Systematic comparison of administrative processes/models or administrative quality assurance with selected benchmark organisations. To learn about areas of improvement by comparing the strengths and weaknesses with relevant benchmark organisations. Internal forums for open dialogue Sharing experiences related to administrative services and processes. To exchange good practices, discuss on areas of development, presenting ideas for further development, fostering quality culture and awareness of administrative quality.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Defining quality in administration: Define what quality means in different tasks in administration and the form an integrated outlook what constitutes of administrative quality.

2. Understanding administrative personnel as a most important prerequisite for higher quality: Design career models for administrative staff and allow flexibility for the status of the staff that falls between the traditional academic/administration divide.

3. Promoting internal coherence in quality assurance at all levels: Clarify the differences and overlaps with three dimensions of quality assurance of administration, integrate them with the overall quality assurance model.

4. Clarifying purposes of administrative quality assurance for greater legitimacy: Identify and communicate the purposes of administrative quality assurance to create shared understanding of the value of quality assurance.

5. Making impact with administrative quality assurance: Continuously evaluate and ensure that the costs associated with quality assurance of administration are balanced with its real impacts.

jussi.kivisto@uta.fi elias.pekkola@uta.fi THANK YOU. jussi.kivisto@uta.fi elias.pekkola@uta.fi