2.3 Conceptual Framework and Definitions of Key Concepts
2.3.5 Academic Effectiveness and Quality – As an Outcome of ERM Implementation
The conceptual framework of this study assumes that the whole ERM process implies certain practices which include ERM adoption criteria ultimately aiming at improving organizational performance, quality and effectiveness. Given the fact that a basic assumption of this study is that the implementation of ERM would lead to the achievement of effective academic performance practices, as manifested clearly in the adopted Conceptual Framework (Figure 2.3), the researcher would present a definition of what academic effectiveness means within the framework of ERM, corporate governance and quality assurance systems, which should be applicable not only to the context of higher education, but rather to the whole context of ERM research at large. More elaborate analyses of the academic effectiveness concept are presented in the Literature Review section. However, the researcher limits his discussion in this section to defining the term within the higher education ERM literature review context.
The UAE CAA (2019a, p. 17) presents academic effectiveness as part of the quality assurance process, a tool which “benchmarks performance [of a given academic institution] against the best equivalent practices of other local and international institutions”. Effectiveness, according to CAA, comes “at the heart” of HEIs’ processes and functions. Campbell (2005) argues that Centra (1993) was among the first
researchers to systematically define what effectiveness would mean in the academic context in terms of good performance. According to Centra (1993), academic performance of the academic staff is mainly and predominantly measured by “effectiveness”. It will be accepted to assume that academic performance is viewed by many as the means by which faculty administrators and members seek to achieve academic excellence in their corporate and educational processes. In their recent research, Saeed and Saeed (2018) define effective academic performance as a concept encompassing “items included in the class observation form focus on instructor's command level of knowledge and teaching strategies in delivering it effectively” (p 182). According to them, the academic performance of academic staff at HEIs is the key factor to the success of the entire process of teaching and learning at higher education level.
Quality in the boundaries of academic processes seem to be a very tricky and hard to define term.
“Quality, like ‘freedom’ or ‘justice’ is an elusive concept. We all have an intuitive understanding of what it means but it is often hard to articulate. It is also a relative concept in that it means different things to different people in different contexts and in relation to different purposes” (Harvey, Burrows and Green, 1992, p. 3). In general terms, quality is defined differently in different contexts. Defining quality in the academic context would mean different things in different perspectives. Woodhouse (2012) assumes that at the time “the academic world started to look to the business world for ideas on quality, it started to struggle with what is meant by quality in higher education” (p. 6). In his attempt to account for a working definition of quality under the umbrella of UAE CAA, Woodhouse (2012, p. 6) makes an outstanding statement while positing that “as the academic world started to look to the business world for ideas on quality, it started to struggle with what is meant by quality in higher education”. However, he argues that the UAE CAA managed to present a solid and brief definition of the term “quality” in that it is always a reference to “fitness for purpose (FFP)” (p. 7). He further emphasizes the fact that this definition can be adopted in different organisations and for multiple purposes. In this sense, Woodhouse (2012), defends the notion that this “definition covers all the other contenders, because all of them imply a specific characteristic or goal (i. e. purpose) that should be achieved. It aligns with the quality audit approach and provides an ‘organising principle’ for approaches to the achievement and checking of quality” (p. 7).
This working definition by CAA aligns with their strategic quality audit approach and poses itself as an organising principle for the establishment, achievement and checking of quality in higher education (ibid.). More importantly, Abukari and Corner (2010) posit that “Quality is an elusive concept, which assumes different meanings in different contexts and can be controversial sometimes. In many cases multifaceted terms such as effectiveness, efficiency and/or equity are used as synonyms of or to expound on its meaning” (p. 194). Abukari and Corner (2010) further define quality in the context of higher
education as “a degree to which the best is got from higher education within a given context (local, national, regional, international) taking cognisance of the objective, process and outcome” (p. 194). In the terms of Murad and Shastri (2010), quality is defined by some researchers as “fitness for use or purpose”, and by others as “conformance to standards”. In general terms, quality aims at satisfying customers’ needs and should maintain the continuous performance of functions as required by customers as per agreed upon standards.
However, in the context of higher education, there are different perspectives for defining quality. Even though some definitions of quality in the context of higher education are not being made directly and would focus mainly on academic stakeholders’ accountability and performance (Al Alami et al. 2017), others would define quality as a framework to address elements such as performance improvement (Kisuniene, 2004). In their study conducted on UAE HEIs, Soomro and Ahmad (2012) define quality in higher education context more extensively. According to them, “Quality is a relative term meaning different things to different people. Some researchers argue that “quality is fitness for use or purpose”
and other believe that it is “conformance to standard”, but in general it should satisfy customers’ needs, and continuously keeps on performing its functions as required by customers as per agreed upon standards (Murad and Rajesh, 2010)” (p. 148). The authors adopted the conceptualization of Arjomandi, Kestell and Grimshaw (2009) of the educational system in quality perspective as being “a collection of several interdependent sub-systems that interact with each other to accomplish the goals of the systems.
This system, as a whole, like other systems also consists of Input – Process – Output” (p. 149).
The conceptual framework adopted by the researcher in this study assumes that academic effectiveness and quality assurance are two major outputs of the whole ERM implementation process. National academic qualifications and accreditation agencies throughout the world, such as the British Accreditation Council (BAC) in the UK and the UAE CAA, endeavour to materialise effectiveness and quality assurance as existing physical departments in their HEI systems for the purpose of enhancing the academic process, student learning and teaching and learning processes. The UAE CAA (2019a, p. 9) for example strongly defended this concept by stating that “Effective operation of the institution’s Quality Assurance/Institutional Effectiveness office is at the heart of this development”. Not only this, but also the CAA (2019a, p. 11) argued that quality assurance or programme effectiveness “relates to all other Standards and is at the heart of the Commission’s determination to assure and enhance high quality”.