Borrador Del Informe Final Del

Abstract and Outline

ECER 2003

(17-20 September 2003, Hamburg)

Student Affairs as Criteria of Quality at Spanish Higher Education: an Internal Perspective

by:

María J. Vieira

Javier Vidal

Sara Junquera

Department of Philosophy and Educational Science

University of León, Spain

Campus de Vegazana, s/n

E-24071 León (España)

This work has been carried out with a grant EA2002-0018 of the Program of Studies and Analyses (2002) of the Directorate-general of Universities. Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport

January, 2003
ABSTRACT

Student affairs are considered in assessment guidelines as criteria of quality at Higher Education Institutions. The aim of this study is to know the provision of student support aimed at helping students in vocational, academic and personal concerns that can be considered as criteria of quality at Higher Education Institutions in Spain. The main source of information has been e-mail questionnaires to 114 persons in charge of student services from 53 universities. The result of this study is a list of general criteria that every institution should accomplish related to student affairs if they are to be accredited or assessed in a satisfactory way.

OUTLINE

1.Introduction to the topic and its relation to the main theme

Among the main concerns of European Higher Education institutions in the 1980’s and 1990’s are the consideration of students as customers (Coaldrake, 2001) and maintaining high standards of quality education (Hämäläinen, Pehu-Voima, & Wahlén, 2001).

As regards the former concern, we must highlight that formerly, the academic culture enshrined in Higher Education institutions was opposed to entrepreneurial considerations. However, students are more and more considered as customers that must be offered clearly defined services through a system of support (Bell, Henry, Heyno, & McDevitt, 1994; UNITE/MORI , 2002). This system is comprised by a wide range of programmes, services, administrative units, functions, etc., whose main objective is to guide students during their stay at the institution. These functions can be carried out by one or more services within each university or by staff who doesn’t specifically belong to student support services (e.g. academic staff) (Ludeman, 2000).

As regards quality assessment, European Higher Education institutions have developed two processes: accreditation and institutional assessment. Among other aspects, institutional assessment is similar to accreditation in that certain quality criteria are established in order to make operational the elusive notion of quality (Harvey, 1999). This idea, together with the trend to consider the student as a customer, justifies the need for considering the system of student support in the criteria of institutional quality.

This study is related to Track 3. Quality Development & Accreditation and aims at providing some ideas about quality criteria which are considered important in Spanish universities as regards student affairs.

2.Problem formulation

In Spain, the National Plan for Quality Assessment include three fields of assessment: teaching, research and services.

Within the assessment of teaching, the support given to students is considered as a set of functions that each degree must offer. The assessment of these aspects usually consists of verifying the existence or non-existence of those functions and their availability, without assessing their efficiency, adequacy or necessity. The assessment of services is carried out through an adaptation of the EFQM model and makes reference to independent administrative units.

In the analysis of these fields of assessment, we find explicit references to the functions of support to students, which are considered as a quality criterion in the assessment of teaching. However, service assessment doesn’t mention which services must be assessed, what results in a lack of information as to the required minimum services every university should offer.

3.Approach and methodology

The objectives of this study are:

To know the functions that comprise the student support system at Higher Education institutions and compare them with the AssessmentGuidelines used in the National Plan for Quality Assessment.
To determine the functions related to student support at Spanish universities which are considered indispensable and which, therefore, could be used as quality criteria for assessing the quality of universities.

The methodology followed in this study was twofold: (a) literature review and content analysis for objective 1, and (b) a 50-items questionnaire related to student support functions found in the previous analysis for objective 2. This questionnaire was aimed at persons in charge of student services at universities.

612 questionnaires were sent at 66 public and private Spanish universities. 114 completed questionnaires were returned. This represents a response rate of 19%. Even though this low rate, we consider more important the fact that opinions come from people from 53 universities, which amounts 80% of the total.

It is not possible to estimate the reliability of these results, since it is not possible to define the population in a precise way, considering the great heterogeneity of these services and the persons in charge of them. However, the sample is wide enough in terms of universities and kinds of services to allow us to consider the results as an approximation to the general opinion.

Therefore, results must be taken as a reasoned proposal, more than as reliable results that need no further confirmation.

4.Results and conclusions

Literature review and content analysis have shown that there is a wide range of functions that constitute the student support system (Ludeman, 2000; Castellano, 1995; Sánchez García, 1998; Watts & Van Esbroeck, 1998; Upcraft & Schuh, 1996). When comparing these functions with the ones in the Assessment Guidelines some of them are not considered in these ones, for instance: support to disabled students, careers information and guidance aimed at students and employers, mechanisms for identifying student needs and making complaints and suggestions, information and guidance about student mobility, financial aid, distance learning programmes, health care and psychological counselling, financial and legal advice, kindergartens, book stores and religious affairs.

The main results of the questionnaire allow us to establish criteria related to student support in institutional assessment and/or accreditation. That is to say, functions regarded as essential can be considered criteria of quality at Higher Education institutions.

In order to establish these criteria, every item has been graded according to a Likert scale from 1 to 4, being 1 not very necessary and 4 indispensable. Bearing in mind our remarks about the population and the sample (see methodology), the four points of the scale have been summed up in two: 1 and 2 being considered as less necessary, and 3 and 4 as very necessary. With this measure, we have calculated the percentage of positive answers (3 and 4), which has been taken as a base for establishing five groups of items which correspond to the following classification: Group 1 (100%-91%), Group 2 (90%-81%), Group 3 (80%-71%), Group 4 (70%-51%), Group 4 (70%-51%), Group 5 (<51%).

The main conclusions of this survey are:

Not all functions related to the same area (academic, careers, welfare, psychological counselling, students with disabilities, etc.) are considered equally important. This result confirms the need for dealing with the student support system through functions, instead of the traditional approach based on services focused on just one aspect and with no relation with the Faculties.

Group 1 items could be considered as requisites in any university and that’s the reason why they could be considered as criteria of quality at Higher Education institutions as regards student support. In this group we can include: Sports and cultural infrastructures and activities, the access of disabled students to the university, careers guidance and advice aimed at students and employers, guidance to students in order to access to the labour market, the existence of mechanisms for making complaints and suggestions, information about the university for freshmen and in secondary schools, guidance on financial aid and grants, and enrolment procedures and guidance for foreign students.

Assessment Guidelines omit some functions of groups 1 and 2 considered as most important by the persons in charge of student services: support for disabled students, careers information and guidance aimed at students and employers, mechanisms for identifying student needs and making complaints and suggestions, and guidance related to student mobility.

Assessment Guidelines don’t include any of the functions included in groups 3 and 4, considered less important by the persons interviewed, what indicates a certain agreement on this issue. These functions make reference to the management of accommodation for students, legal and financial advice, psychological counselling not related with academic matters, and religious affairs.

5.Implications

The information contained in the established groups can be useful both for modifying the Assessment Guidelines developed by the agencies in charge of assessment processes in Europe, and for those responsible for the improvement of the quality of universities to become more student-oriented.

6.References

Bell, E., Henry, H., Heyno, A., & McDevitt, C. (1994). United Kingdom. FEDORA & Istituto Italiano per gli Studi Filosofici. In Psychological counselling in Higher Education. A European Overview (pp. 121-135). Napoli: La Città del Sole.

Castellano, F. (1995). La orientación educativa en la Universidad de Granada. Granada: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Granada.

Coaldrake, P. (2001). Responding to changing student expectations. Higher Education Management, 13(2), 75-92.

Hämäläinen, K., Pehu-Voima, S., & Wahlén, S. (2001). Institutional Evaluations in Europe. Helsinki: ENQA.

Harvey, L. (1999). Quality in Higher Education. Paper presented at Swedish Quality Conference, Göteborg.

Ludeman, R. B. (2000). The role of student affairs and services in Higher Education: A practical manual for developing, implementing, and assessing student affairs programs and services. IASAS/UNESCO.

Sánchez García, M. F. (1998). Las funciones y necesidades de orientación en la universidad: un estudio comparativo sobre las opiniones de universitarios y profesionales. Revista de Orientación Psicopedagógica, 9(15), 87-107.

UNITE/MORI. (2002). Student living report 2002. En UNITE/MORI .

Upcraft, M. L., & Schuh, J. H. (1996). Assessment in Student Affairs. A Guide for Practitioners. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Watts, A. G., & Van Esbroeck, R. (1998). New Skills for New Futures: Higher Education Guidance and Counselling Services in the European Union. Brussels: VUB University Press.