Individual Presentation Tertiary Education Quality Standards Agency Conference 2019

Can Students Judge Quality? Unpacking Student Partnership in University Governance   (#44)

Mollie Dollinger 1 , Chi Mai 1
  1. La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC, Australia

Notions of quality in higher education are increasingly incorporating diverse perspectives from industry and professional accreditation bodies (e.g. Pillay, 2009; Smith et al., 2008). This shift signifies a relaxing of the control of the academy on who gets to define quality at universities and a growing recognition of the need to make higher education’s value to society more explicit. However, the voices of external stakeholders are not the only new perspectives that are necessary to enhance quality and ensure universities are future-ready. Students can, and should, be included in discussions of how to define, assess and improve quality assurance in higher education (Coates, 2005; Seale, 2009).

 A whole-of-institution approach to the inclusion of students throughout formal and informal university decision-making processes (e.g. governance committees, working groups, advisory boards, etc.) will be presented.  We situate our work within the TEQSA guidelines and the need to support student voices and developing ideas around social equity and student rights’ in higher education (Dollinger & Mercer-Mapstone, forthcoming; Svensson & Wood, 2007; TEQSA, 2017). Additionally, we will offer reflection on the question of students’ ability to judge quality. Previous work has highlighted the benefit of gaining the student perspective on teaching or assessment feedback quality (Ferguson, 2011; Marsh, 2007), however, there is less research concerning students’ ability to judge quality outside of teaching and learning contexts. To ground this discussion therefore we will draw on literature that has consistently shown the benefits of collaborating with novice users for organisations (e.g. Kujala, 2003; Sanders, 2002). We will thus provide a rationale to support student partnership in university governance and decision-making and present a framework that introduces the dimensions (e.g. student services, course advisory boards) and methods (e.g. in-person representation, crowdsourcing) for student partnership in university governance.  

  1. Coates, H. (2005). The value of student engagement for higher education quality assurance. Quality in Higher Education, 11(1), 25-36.
  2. Dollinger, M. & Mercer-Mapstone, L. (forthcoming). What’s in a name? Unpacking Students’ Roles in Higher Education through Neoliberal and Social Justice Lenses. Journal of Teaching and Learning Inquiry.
  3. Ferguson, P. (2011). Student perceptions of quality feedback in teacher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(1), 51-62.
  4. Kujala, S. (2003). User involvement: a review of the benefits and challenges. Behaviour & Information Technology, 22(1), 1-16.
  5. Marsh, H. W. (2007). Students’ evaluations of university teaching: Dimensionality, reliability, validity, potential biases and usefulness. In The scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education: An evidence-based perspective (pp. 319-383). Springer, Dordrecht.
  6. Pillay, H. K., & Kimber, M. (2009). Quality assurance in higher education: for whom and of what?. International Journal of Management in Education, 3(3/4), 270-281.
  7. Sanders, E. B. N. (2002). From user-centered to participatory design approaches. In Design and the Social Sciences (pp. 18-25). CRC Press.
  8. Seale, J. (2009). Doing student voice work in higher education: an exploration of the value of participatory methods. British Educational Research Journal, 36(6), 995-1015.
  9. Smith, R., Mackay, D., Holt, D., & Challis, D. (2008). Expanding the realm of best practices in cooperative industry-based learning in information systems and information technology: an inter-institutional investigation in Australian higher education. Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 9(1), 73-80.
  10. Svensson, G., & Wood, G. (2007). Are university students really customers? When illusion may lead to delusion for all!. International journal of educational management, 21(1), 17-28.
  11. TEQSA (2017). TEQSA Regulator Performance Framework Report 2016-2017. Accessed at https://www.teqsa.gov.au/latest-news/publications/teqsa-regulator-performanceframework-report-2016-2017