Advertisement

Tertiary Education and Management

, Volume 20, Issue 3, pp 239–251 | Cite as

Not just another evaluation: a comparative study of four educational quality projects at Swedish universities

  • Sara KarlssonEmail author
  • Karin Fogelberg
  • Åsa Kettis
  • Stefan Lindgren
  • Mette Sandoff
  • Lars Geschwind
Article

Abstract

In this study, four recent self-initiated educational quality projects at Swedish universities are compared and analyzed. The article focuses on how the universities have handled the tension between external demands and internal norms. The aim is to contribute to an improved understanding of quality management in contemporary universities. On the one hand, the projects are found to be built on similar rationales associated with accountability, reputation building and strategic management. This is interpreted as a response to the shared external policy context. They are also found to mirror similar ambitions regarding raising the status of education. On the other hand, the projects are found to differ considerably in their actual design, methodology, implementation, stakeholders and outcomes. This is interpreted as an active adaptation to the unique internal academic norms and cultures that exist in each university.

Keywords

quality management strategic planning higher education policy/development organization structures 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Becher, T., & Trowler, P. R. (2001). Academic tribes and territories–Intellectual inquiry and the culture of disciplines (2nd ed.). Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Case, J. M., & Light, G. (2011). Emerging research methodologies in engineering education research. Journal of Engineering Education, 100, 186–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clark, B. R. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organizational pathways of transformation. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  4. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education (7th ed.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Czarniawska, B., & Joerges, B. (1996). Travels of ideas. In B. Czarniawska & G. Sevón (Eds.), Translating organizational change (pp. 13–48). Berlin: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fägerlind, I., & Strömqvist, G. (Eds.). (2004). Reforming higher education in the Nordic countries–Studies of change in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  8. Ferlie, E., Musselin, C., & Andresani, G. (2008). The steering of higher education systems: A public management perspective. Higher Education, 56, 325–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gornitzka, Å. (1999). Governmental policies and organisational change in higher education. Higher Education, 38, 5–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Göteborgs universitet. (2013). BLUE 11–Översyn av utbildningsprogram vid Göteborgs universitet–bakgrund, process och diskussion [BLUE 11–Review of study programmes at the University of Gothenburg–background, process and discussion]. Göteborg: Göteborgs universitet.Google Scholar
  11. Gumport, P. (2000). Academic restructuring: Organizational change and institutional imperatives. Higher Education, 39, 67–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Harvey, L., & Stensaker, B. (2008). Quality culture: Understandings, boundaries and linkages. European Journal of Education, 43, 427–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hedmo, T., Sahlin, K., & Wedlin, L. (2005). Fields of imitation: The global expansion of management education. In B. Czarniawska & G. Sevón (Eds.), Global ideas: How ideas, objects and practices travel in the global economy (pp. 190–212). Liber: Malmö.Google Scholar
  14. Higher Education Academy. (2009). Reward and recognition of teaching in higher education: A collaborative investigation: Interim report. York: The Higher Education Academy and the GENIE Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning, University of Leicester. Retrieved from https://doi.org/www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/publications/Reward_and_Recognition_ResourceGoogle Scholar
  15. KTH Royal Institute of Techology. (2012). Education Assessment Exercise (EAE) 2011. Evaluation for quality development at KTH–project summary. Stockholm: KTH.Google Scholar
  16. Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  17. Lund University. (2011). Final report: EQ11–University-wide development of education at Lund University. Lund: Author.Google Scholar
  18. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  19. Ministry of Education and Research. (2010a). En akademi i tiden–ökad frihet för universitet och högskolor [Academia for this day and age–greater freedom for universities and other higher education institutions]. Prop. 2009/10:149.Google Scholar
  20. Ministry of Education and Research. (2010b). Fokus på kunskap–kvalitet i den högre utbildningen [Focus on knowledge–quality in higher education]. Prop. 2009/10:139.Google Scholar
  21. Ministry of Education and Research. (2010c). Konkurrera med kvalitet–studieavgifter för utländska studenter [Competing on the basis of quality–tuition fees for foreign students]. Prop. 2009/10:65.Google Scholar
  22. Olsen, J. P. (2007). The institutional dynamics of the European university. In P. Maassen & J. P. Olsen (Eds.), University dynamics and European integration (pp. 25–54). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Olssen, M., & Peters, M. A. (2005). Neoliberalism, higher education and the knowledge economy: From the free market to knowledge capitalism. Journal of Education Policy, 20, 313–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Öquist, G., & Benner, M. (2012). Fostering breakthrough research: A comparative study. Stockholm: The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
  25. Pinheiro, R., Geschwind, L., & Aarrevaara, T. (2014). Nested tensions and interwoven dilemmas in higher education: The view from the Nordic countries. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 7, 233–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2011). Public management reform: A comparative analysis: New public management, governance, and the neo-Weberian state. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Ramirez, F. O. (2010). Accounting for excellence: Transforming universities into organizational actors. In L. Portnoi, V. D. Rust, & S. S. Bagley (Eds.), Higher education, policy, and the global competition phenomenon (pp. 43–58). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Røvik, K.-A. (1996). Deinstitutionalization and the logic of fashion. In B. Czarniawska & G. Sevón (Eds.), Translating organizational change (pp. 139–172). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  29. Sahlin, K. (2012). The interplay of organizing models in higher education: What room is there for collegiality in universities characterized by bounded autonomy? In B. Stensaker, J. Välimaa, & C. Sarrico (Eds.), Managing reform in universities. The dynamics of culture, identity and organisational change (pp. 198–221). Basingstoke: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  30. Sahlin, K. (2013). Global themes and institutional ambiguity. Rankings and management models on the move. In G. S. Drori, M. A. Höllerer, & P. Walgenbach (Eds.), Global themes and local variations in organization and management: Perspectives on glocalization (pp. 52–64). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Sahlin, K., & Wedlin, L. (2008). Circulating ideas: Imitation, translation and editing. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, K. Sahlin, & R. Suddaby (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 218–242). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Stensaker, B., & Harvey, L. (Eds.). (2011). Accountability in higher education: Global perspectives on trust and power (p. 270). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  33. Styhre, A. (2009). Byråkrati–teoretiker, kritiker och försvarare [Bureaucracy–theorists, critics and defenders]. Liber: Malmö.Google Scholar
  34. Uppsala University. (2013). Creative educational development at Uppsala University 2010–2012. Uppsala: Author.Google Scholar
  35. Van Vught, F. (2008). Mission diversity and reputation in higher education. Higher Education Policy, 21, 151–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The European Higher Education Society 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sara Karlsson
    • 1
    Email author
  • Karin Fogelberg
    • 2
  • Åsa Kettis
    • 3
  • Stefan Lindgren
    • 4
  • Mette Sandoff
    • 5
  • Lars Geschwind
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of LearningKTH Royal Institute of TechnologyStockholmSweden
  2. 2.The Board of Teacher EducationUniversity of GothenburgGothenburgSweden
  3. 3.Quality and Evaluation UnitUppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden
  4. 4.Department of Clinical SciencesLund UniversityLundSweden
  5. 5.Department of Business AdministrationUniversity of GothenburgGothenburgSweden

Personalised recommendations