Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Obtaining a picture of undergraduate education quality: a voice from inside the university

  • Published:
Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study aims to construct ranking indicators from the perspective inside of the university and shift the ranking target from overall university quality to undergraduate education quality. In dealing with the complexity of the concept of undergraduate education quality, two-stage questionnaire survey was conducted to gain comprehensive opinions from 20 higher education evaluation experts. The Fuzzy Delphi Method then was introduced to perform data analysis and help final indicator selection as well as the distribution of weights. The results compared with ranking systems conducted by US NEWS and Guardian showed weighting differences and greater comprehensiveness in terms of the types of measures, sources of data and different perspectives from the students, employers and the academics. Most important of all, this study provided a more transparent ranking system and detailed ranking methodology that are crucial for users’ understanding and use of the ranking system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Altbach, P. G. (2006). The dilemmas of ranking. Higher Education Digest, 55, 9–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Billing, D. (2003). Evaluation of a trans-national University Quality Assessment Project in Bulgaria. Perspectives, 7(1), 19–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodjanova, S. (2006). Median alpha-levels of a fuzzy number. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 157(7), 879–891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowden, R. (2000). Fantasy higher education: University and college league tables. Quality in Higher Education, 6(1), 41–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, R. L. (2005). Measuring university quality. The Review of Higher Education, 29(1), 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buela-Casal, G., Gutiérrez-Martínez, O., Bermúdez-Sánchez, M. P., & Vadillo-Muñoz, O. (2007). Comparative study of international academic rankings of universities. Scientometrics, 71(3), 349–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler-Adam, J. (2007). Response to questionnaire on developing a quality rating mechanism for African universities. In Neil Butcher and Associates (Eds.). Johannesburg.

  • Carrico, C. S., Hogan, S. M., Dyson, R. G., & Athanassopoulos, A. D. (1997). Data envelopment analysis and university selection. The Journal of the Operations Research Society, 48(12), 1163–1177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, P. T., Huang, L. C., & Lin, H. J. (2000). The fuzzy Delphi method via fuzzy statistics and membership function fitting and an application to the human resources. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 112(3), 511–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CHE Report. (2000). Towards a new higher education landscape: Meeting the equality, quality and social development imperatives of South Africa in the 21st century. Retrieved 1, March, 2008, from http://www.polity.org.za/govdocs/reports/education/chereport.html.

  • Chen, S. J., & Huang, C. L. (1992). Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making methods and applications. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, M. (2002). Some guidelines for academic quality rankings. Higher Education in Europe, 27(4), 443–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, M. (2004). International issues in quality assessment: Limitations of the weight-and-sum approach to ranking the academic quality of institutions of higher education. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Australian Universities Quality Forum 2004.

  • Clarke, M. (2005). Quality assessment lessons from Australia and New Zealand. Higher Education in Europe, 30(2), 183–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dichev, I. (2001). News or noise? Estimating the noise in the US News university rankings. Research in Higher Education, 42(3), 237–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dill, D. D., & Soo, M. (2004). Is there a global definition of academic quality?: A cross-national analysis of university ranking systems. Paper presented at the Public Policy for Academic Quality Research Program.

  • Dill, D. D., & Soo, M. (2005). Academic quality, league tables, and public policy: A cross-national analysis of university ranking systems. Higher Education, 49, 495–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, C. (2002). The use of university rankings in the United Kingdom. Higher Education in Europe, 27(4), 423–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrenberg, R. G. (2002). Reaching for the brass ring: The US News & World Report rankings and competition. The Review of Higher Education, 26(2), 145–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Federkeil, G. (2002). Some aspects of ranking methodology—The CHE-ranking of German universities. Higher Education in Europe, 27(4), 389–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, D. (1994). What is quality in higher education? Concepts, policy and practice. In D. Green (Ed.), What is quality in higher education? (pp. 3–20). Buckingham: Open University press and Society for Research into Higher Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, L. (2002). The end of quality? Quality in Higher Education, 8(1), 5–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, L., & Green, D. (1993). Defining quality. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(1), 9–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hazelkorn, E. (2006). Impact and influence of league tables and ranking systems on institutional decision-making. Ireland: Dublin Institute of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, A., Breen, R., Lindsay, R., & Brew, A. (2003). Re-shaping teaching in higher education: Linking teaching and research. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lagrosen, S., Seyyed-Hashemi, R., & Leitner, M. (2004). Examination of the dimensions of quality in higher education. Quality Assurance in Education, 12(2), 61–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, H. (2006). Excellence without a soul: How a great university forgot education: PublicAffairs.

  • Marginson, S. (2006). Global university rankings at the end of 2006. Is this the hierarchy we have to have? Paper presented at the OCEDE.

  • Marginson, S. (2007). Global university comparisons: The second stage. Paper presented at the International Trends in University Rankings and Classifications—Griffith University/IRU Symposium.

  • Merisotis, J. (2002). Summary report of the invitational roundtable on statistical indicators for the quality assessment of higher/tertiary education institutions: Ranking and league table methodologies. Higher Education in Europe, 27(4), 475–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merisotis, J., & Sadlak, J. (2005). Higher education rankings: Evolution, acceptance, and dialogue. Higher Education in Europe, 30(2), 97–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miyoshi, M. (2000). Ivory tower in Escrow. Boundary 2, 27(1), 7–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mok, K. H. (2000). Impact of globalization: A study of quality assurance systems of higher education in Hong Kong and Singapore. Comparative Education Review, 44(2), 148–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, L. M., & Canaan, J. E. (2004). Conceptualizing higher education students as social actors in a globalizing world: A special issue. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 17(6), 739–749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, H. G., Magennis, S. P., & Carey, L. J. (1995). Performance indicators and league tables: A call for standards. Higher Education Quarterly, 49(2), 128–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mullin, R., & Wilson, G. (2000). Quality of undergraduate education: Examining the current paradigm and system. Journal of Quality Management, 5, 225–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ragin, C. C. (2007). Qualitative comparative analysis using fuzzy sets(fsQCA). In Configurational comparative analysis. London: Sage Publications.

  • Salih, H. (2003). Discussions. Paper presented at the Commission II—Quality of higher education.

  • Srikanthan, G., & Dalrymple, J. (2003). Developing alternative perspectives for quality in higher education. The International Journal of Educational Management, 17(3), 126–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stella, A., & Woodhouse, D. (2006a). Ranking of higher education institutions [Electronic Version]. Retrieved February 3, 2008, from http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-5479051/The-mission-of-the-university.html.

  • Stella, A., & Woodhouse, D. (2006b). Ranking of higher education institutions [Electronic Version]. AUQA Occasional Publications Number 6.

  • Stephenson, S. L. (2004). Saving quality from quality assurance. Perspectives, 8(3), 62–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (2006, 6–8 February 2008). International conference on accreditation, quality assurance and recognition of qualifications in higher education in Africa. Paper presented at the International Conference on Accreditation, Quality Assurance and Recognition of Qualifications in Higher Education in Africa, Nairobi, Kenya.

  • Usher, A., & Savino, M. (2006). A world of difference: A global survey of university league tables. Toronto: Educational Policy Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Dyke, N. (2005). Twenty years of university report cards. Higher Education in Europe, 30(2), 103–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Dr. Amy Roberts from University of Wyoming for her full support and assistance during the preparation of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate School of Education, University of Bristol, 35 Berkeley Square, Clifton, Bristol, BS8 1JA, UK

    Chia-Wei Tang

  2. College of Education, National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan

    Cheng-Ta Wu

Authors
  1. Chia-Wei Tang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cheng-Ta Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chia-Wei Tang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tang, CW., Wu, CT. Obtaining a picture of undergraduate education quality: a voice from inside the university. High Educ 60, 269–286 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-009-9299-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-009-9299-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation