Comparative and correlation analysis of experimental work on the formation of readiness to conduct intra-university quality monitoring

The problem of the formation of the teacher's readiness to conduct intra-university monitoring of the quality of students' education is considered. On the basis of the developed system for the formation of a teacher's readiness to conduct intra-university monitoring of the quality of student learning, it is currently a mechanism for managing this process. The article presents the materials of the correlation analysis of the results of experimental work on the formation of a teacher's readiness to conduct intra-university monitoring of the quality of student learning, considered as an integrative personality trait, a system-forming information-research, operational-activity, analytical, reflective and managerial components reflecting the level of knowledge and skills to apply methods, technologies and means of conducting intra-university monitoring of the quality of student learning, to assess the quality of mastering an academic discipline. Based on the materials of experimental work, the relationship between the components of readiness and between the dominant indicators in their structure is proved. In the course of a comparative analysis of the results of the ascertaining and formative experiments, a connection was established between the types of teacher's readiness to conduct intra-university monitoring of the quality of student learning, which proves its integrative nature, and their compensatory role was also revealed due to the dominant indicators. In the course of the implementation of the developed system, the teachers' need for solving innovative problems increased (an indicator of the managerial type of readiness). The results obtained indicate the development of all components of readiness in the process of professional development. The analysis carried out allows us to speak about the possibility of forming the types of teacher readiness to conduct intra-university monitoring of the quality of student learning due to the compensatory properties of the types of readiness.

Quality Systems for a Responsible Management in the University

Literature on university quality systems and teaching performance measurement addresses only tangentially the neutrality of measurement instruments in relation to the different teaching methodologies. This chapter explores this issue posing the following question: Should we use identical assessment instruments on teachers who apply different teaching methodologies? The authors attempt to answer this question by focusing the debate on the two most widespread methodological approaches in the university: the behaviourist and the constructivist. The study addresses this task from the perspective of measurement instruments with behavioural episodes. The authors present two instruments to assess teaching performance: one aimed at evaluating teachers who use behaviourist approaches and the other aimed at assessing teachers who apply constructivist approaches. The work reveals divergences between the two questionnaires addressing the importance of using different teaching appraisal instruments to measure, responsibly, the performance of teachers who apply different teaching methodologies.

Valuations by Spanish university students on online assessment in times of pandemic

This study describes the assessment that university students make regarding the model of evaluation of Higher Education during the period of confinement by COVID-19 in Spain. We developed a descriptive study through an online questionnaire designed from the assessment and qualification proposals presented by Spanish Network of University Quality Agencies (REACU), The National Agency for Quality Assessment and Accreditation (ANECA), UNESCO and the Spanish Ministry of Universities. Following its application to a sample of 1008 students from across the country, it is observed that university students demand greater flexibility in online assessment, introduce learning-oriented assessment practices in accordance with a formative and continuous assessment approach, in addition to using various strategies and instruments. However, they are reluctant to introduce peer evaluation mechanisms, although they do propose democratic evaluation. The future of Higher Education, after COVID-19, is adopting hybrid and mixed models of training and evaluation, so it is imperative to investigate students’ vision and analyse the practices developed during the crisis to reinforce an assessment in Higher Education that ensures equity and enhances learning.

Profile of University Graduate’s Satisfaction for Educational Programs

The purpose of the article is to theoretically substantiate the concept of a graduate’s satisfaction profile with educational programs, which includes a number of parameters. This concept is proposed to be introduced in connection with monitoring the satisfaction of university graduates with educational programs. The methodology for measuring graduate satisfaction is based on the use of quantitative (questionnaires, the results of which are processed in SPSS) and qualitative (interviewing) methods. Graduates’ satisfaction with the quality of higher education is considered as a subjective assessment of the quality of their education. The proposed and tested methodology can become the basis for the development of a university system for monitoring the satisfaction of university graduates with educational programs and a university quality management system.

Influence of institutional seniority and type of ownership on university quality rankings: correlational analysis of Peruvian universities

PurposeThis study evaluates the correlations between the universities' type of property (public, private associative and private corporate), institutional seniority (<20, 20–45 and >45 years) and the presence and position in national and international university rankings.Design/methodology/approachIt considers 90 Peruvian universities certified by SUNEDU (public agency for the accreditation of universities in Peru). According to their presence in 20 university rankings (yes/no) and the position (tertiles) in two world rankings: Webometrics and SIR Iberoamericano, four universities participated in 10 or more rankings and only 16 (18%) in six or more.FindingsThe private corporate universities were the least old (p < 0.01). No association was found with the type of property both in the presence in rankings and in the positioning (p > 0.05), except in one where there was less participation of public institutions. Long-lived universities had higher participation and better positioning in rankings than those with less seniority (p < 0.01). The presence and better positioning in university rankings depend on institutional seniority and not on the type of ownership in Peruvian licensed universities.Originality/valueThis research highlights the lack of equity in several international rankings for the evaluation of the quality of universities, in the respect that most of them give priority to aspects related to institutional seniority and size. At the same time, the results of younger and smaller institutions are not put into perspective.

Self-evaluation process and university quality in Ecuador

The quality of Higher Education in the Ecuador has been a topic widely addressed in the last 10 years, generating transcendental changes from the modification of the structures of the system to the reconsideration of its planning and processes. The purpose of this research is to study the process of self-evaluation and quality in institutions of higher education of the Ecuador. For this, a qualitative research was carried out where models, management indicators and general aspects based on current laws were conceptualized. It is concluded that it is imperative to promote the self-evaluation of universities, not only for accreditation purposes but as a complex and continuous social process in their ontological, gnoseological and axiological references, contributing to the progress and reconstruction of the substantial processes of the institution, in order to improve its management mechanisms and respond satisfactorily to the expectations of the entire university community; under own institutional guidelines and follow-ups and of the quality assurance system in education superior.