Jurnal Pendidik dan Pendidikan, Jil. 24, 17–32,
2009
17
QUALITY EDUCATION
MANAGEMENT AT PRIVATE
UNIVERSITIES IN
BANGLADESH: AN EXPLORATORY STUDY
Mohammad
A. Ashraf and Yusnidah Ibrahim
College
of Business, Universiti Utara Malaysia,
06010,
UUM Sintok, Kedah
E-mail:
mashraf@monisys.ca, yibrahim@uum.edu.my
Mohd. H.
R. Joarder
School of
Business, United International University,
80-8A
Dhanmandi R/A, Dhaka 1209, Bangladesh
E-mail: joarder@uiu.ac.bd
Abstract: An exploratory survey was conducted to analyse the
consumers’ (students’) evaluation of private higher education sectors in
Bangladesh with particular reference to the quality as well as the cost of
education. The sample was taken on a random basis from about ten private
universities in the Dhaka metropolitan area. The respondents (students) were
asked to evaluate the quality and the cost of education at private universities
in Bangladesh. Respondents ranked the attributes according to a number of
itemised sevenpoint scale ratings bounded at each end by one of two bipolar
adjectives. The results of this study show that faculty credentials, the
academic calendar, campus facilities, research facilities and cost of education
are associated with quality education, and that the consumers feel most of the
private universities in Bangladesh provide quality education at
unreasonably higher costs.
Keywords: quality management, cost of education,
satisfaction, private universities
Abstrak: Satu kajian penerokaan telah dijalankan untuk menganalisa
penilaian pelajar ke atas sektor pengajian tinggi swasta di Bangladesh terutamanya
dari aspek kualiti dan kos pendidikan. Sampel kajian diambil secara rawak dalam
kalangan pelajar daripada 10 universiti swasta yang beroperasi dalam bandar
metropolitan Dhaka. Responden (pelajar) telah diminta menjawab untuk menjawab
soalan berkaitan kualiti dan kos pengajian di universiti swasta di Bangladesh
berasaskan skala likert tujuh titik. Hasil kajian ini menunjukkan bahawa
kredibiliti fakulti, kalendar akademik, kelengkapan kampus dan kos pendidikan
mempunyai hubungan dengan kualiti pendidikan, dan pelajar merasakan bahawa
kebanyakan universiti swasta di Bangladesh menawarkan pendidikan berkualiti pada
kos tinggi yang tidak berpatutan.
Kata kunci: pengurusan kualiti, kos pendidikan, kepuasan,
universiti swasta
INTRODUCTION
Since
that enactment of the Private Universities Act of 1992, Bangladesh has seen a
tremendous growth in the number of private educational platforms over Mohammad
A. Ashraf et al. 18 the recent years, mainly through the emergence of a
large number of universities in the private sector. Yet, this growth also has a
downside to it, as rapid expansion entails a risk of compromise on quality and
expenses. However, the combined effect is a vibrant education sector with a
healthy rivalry among the competing institutions. Undoubtedly, the main
beneficiary is the student community, which gains access to a wider platform of
selection with the comparative cost advantage of domestic study over studying
abroad. Thus, society and the nation are the ultimate gainers (Chowdhury,
2004). Surprisingly, about 95% of these universities are located in Dhaka’s
metropolitan areas. While in the year 2000 there were only 17 of these
universities, today the number has reached 53 (Kabir, 2006). Obviously, this
growth rate seems unhealthy in consideration of the per capita income of the
country and also in terms of quality assurance in higher education, as
education at these universities is much more expensive than at the public universities
of Bangladesh. One very familiar feature of these universities is the way they
follow the American method of education rather than the British model. They
offer four-year bachelor degree programs with credit-based courses. This system
has also created popular appeal in Bangladesh. Still, regulators and consumers
have concerns about service quality, design and costs (Haque, 2004). As of
today, there is nobody to regulate
private universities and to assure the quality of education
other than through the weak supervision of the University Grant Commission
(UGC). Since private universities receive no funding from the UGC, there is
little that the UGC can do except report some facts for the government (Alam et
al., 2007). The issue is, therefore, an important variable for higher educational
private institutes that aspire to that degree of excellence. This study is, thus,
an attempt to examine the opinion or satisfaction level of the clientele or consumers
(students) regarding the quality and cost of education in the private sector in
Bangladesh.
WHAT ARE QUALITY AND QUALITY IN EDUCATION?
Whenever
quality in education is mentioned, it may be vital to establish what is understood
by the term “quality,” because different professionals such as educators,
researchers and politicians perceive this term differently. The term “quality”
is derived from the Latin word “qualitas,” which means the degree
of excellence of a thing (Oxford Dictionary, 2003). Coombs (1985: 105) defines
the word quality as: qualitative dimensions mean more than the quality of
education as customarily defined and judged by student learning achievements,
in terms of traditional curriculum and standards. Quality... also pertains to
the relevance of what is taught and learned—to how well it fits the Quality
Education Management 19 present and future needs of the particular learners
in question, given their particular circumstances and prospects. It also refers
to significant changes in the educational system itself, in the nature of
its inputs; its objectives, curricula and
educational technologies; and its socioeconomic, cultural and political
environment. In terms of quality in education, the World Bank (1995: 46) puts
forth the following concept: Quality in education is difficult to define and
measure. An adequate definition must include student outcomes.
Most educators would also include in the
definition the nature of the educational experiences that help to produce thus
outcomes—the learning environment. Murgatroyd and Morgan (1994: 45–46) offer
two different definitions of quality. One is related to quality assurance, and
the other is from consumers’ points of view, which are as follows: Quality
assurance refers to the determination of standards, appropriate methods and
quality requirements by an expert body, accompanied by a process of inspection
or evaluation that examines the extent to which practice meets these standards;
and consumer-driven quality refers to a notion of quality in which those who
are to receive a product or service make explicit their expectations for this
product or service and quality is defined in terms of meeting or exceeding the expectations
of customers. Murgatroyd and Morgan (1994) argue that the concept of quality
includes a customer-driven perspective that is a derivative of economic
theories. In fact, service quality has now become an important dimension for
education providers, as with any other business organisations. Hence, customer
evaluations of the quality of education should be an integral part of overall
quality management in any of the organisations (Haque, 2004).
Quality, and in particular quality assessment
and assurance procedures, have received a great deal of attention in higher
education all over the world in recent years. “Quality of education” has been
described by Rowley (1996: 12), from the original source by Gordon and
Partington (1993) as follows: Mohammad A. Ashraf et al. 20 The success
with which an institution provides educational environments which enable students
effectively to achieve worthwhile learning goals including appropriate academic
standards. Thus, the quality issue in private universities in particular is of
special interest in the contexts of Bangladesh and other developing countries
in the world.
GROWTH PATTERNS OF PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES IN
BANGLADESH
The
spectacular growth and expansion of the private universities in Bangladesh is depicted
in Figure 1. The first private university, namely the North South University
(NSU), was approved by the government of Bangladesh (GoB) on 5 November 1992
(Alam et al., 2007). The government in power at that time (1991–1996) showed a
favourable stance towards opening the door to more private universities in
Bangladesh. Figure 2 shows that during the period of 1991–1996, sixteen private
universities (mostly in metropolitan Dhaka, with only two in Chittagong) were
opened. During 1996–2001, the government was not favourably disposed toward the
concept of private sector of education. Data show that only four new
universities were added to the list during 1996–2001. After 2001, the private
university concept got a significant boost again. Figure 1 shows data taken
from UCG that in a 6 to 7 years period, the total number of private universities
has gone up to 56 (UGC, 2008).
LITERATURE REVIEW
are a large number of reports and theoretical
works on quality from the perspective of quality assurance and quality
improvement. In many of them, research scholars have identified different views
on the issue of quality education and its determining factors. However, a very
limited amount of empirical work is available on this particular issue in the
case of Bangladeshi private higher educational organisations. Andaleeb (2003)
analysed seven issues crucial for effectively fostering higher education in
Bangladesh, namely, teaching quality, method, content, peer quality, direct
facilities, indirect facilities and political climate. Quality Education
Management 21 Source: Field Study by the authors (2009) Figure 1: Growth
of private universities in Bangladesh, 1992–2008 Sabur (2004) compared private
and public educations on the basis of quality assurance. He discussed several
points of debate rather than prescribing any solutions to problems regarding
the quality of education associated with the two different platforms.
Spanbauer (1992) discussed the need for
educational institutions to institute quality policies. Lamanga (2002)
highlighted three different aspects involved in measuring quality education in
private universities in Bangladesh: the quality of teaching and research,
responsiveness to the demands of the labour market, and equity. Dhali (1999)
emphasised techniques related to student evaluation procedures, which he
classifies as either formative or summative. In Lamanga’s (2006) report on
quality assurance in tertiary education in the case of Bangladesh, he
recommended several initiatives that can ultimately ensure a quality education
system for the higher learning institutions in the country. Aminuzzaman (2007)
noted that most departments of universities do not have a long-term national
vision, but that such a vision is crucial to quality education. Mohammad A.
Ashraf et al. 22 According to Aminuzzaman (2007): Quality education in
universities will be achieved through changing the method of teaching and
learning as well as assessment methods, renewing the curriculum continually,
updating and upgrading professional knowledge and skills and improving the
broader educational, administrative and resource environments.
Actually,
the student/lecturer interface is important in determining quality, and it is
appropriate to seek to monitor this quality through appropriate quality assurance
processes. Though this is a superficial approach, the real challenge is the
enhancement of quality. Different institutions have started to investigate approaches
to quality enhancement (Rowley, 1996). For instance, Hart and Shoolbred (1993)
cited Wolverhampton University as seeking registration under BS 5750 and a
number of other universities as taking the TQM path, including Aston, South
Bank, Robert Gordons and Wolverhampton. Other contributions that describe
initiatives in this area include Marchese (1991), Ewell (1991) and Cornesky
(1991). A paper by the Further Education Unit (1991) offers six criteria for a
quality model: (1) it seeks to improve the quality of teaching and learning strategies,
(2) it is flexible, (3) it harnesses the commitment of all staff, (4) the learner
should be involved, (5) there must be enhanced working relationships associated
with all functions of the organisation, and (6) requirements can be measured and
progress can be demonstrated.
Hart and Shoolbred (1993) seek to emphasise the
relationship between quality and culture; it is relevant to mention that
quality management is after all related to how people act, and that this element
of action is manifested in an organisation’s work atmosphere and culture. If
further and higher education institutions are proceeding to make serious moves
towards effective quality assurance, they need to be aware of how much the culture
may have to change. This may be highly uncomfortable for senior management and
for the entire workforce of the institution. With respect to the cost of
private university education, Kotler (2003) is right to mention that cost is a
foregoing measure or an exchange price or sacrifice made to secure a benefit.
Hence, the cost of education, according to Kotler, means the sacrifice made or
price paid by the beneficiaries (students) so that they can achieve the specific
objective of learning. Previous findings have reported mostly results that are
based on purely theoretical considerations. Given the circumstances, the
present study takes the initiative to conduct an empirical investigation based
on a new approach that evaluates the quality as well as the cost of education
in the private sector of Quality Education Management 23 Bangladesh. The
findings from this study are valuable in guiding professionals and
policy-makers to further formulate effective educational policy in this country.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The main
source of data used was a field-level survey conducted during the spring
session of 2007 at some selected private universities in Dhaka. Those universities
have all been in existence for at least ten years. A structured questionnaire
was used in the survey. The respondents (students) were asked to what degree
the quality and costs of education services offered by the private universities
corresponded to their expectations with respect to the 36 variables related to
the seven dimensions of the quality-cost perception difference model. The items
were applied to a seven-point “Likert type” scale (Likert, 1932). For this
measurement, a score of 1 on the scale indicates strong disagreement and ascore
of 7 indicates strong agreement. The questionnaire was pre-tested on students,
and finally, data were collected from 360 students.
Among them, 200 students were in Bachelor
programs and 160 were in graduate programs. The students were interviewed face
to face through personal visits by the authors to the university campuses. The
respondents said which score best indicated how they would describe the attributes
being rated. A reliability test was conducted to verify the internal
consistency of the variables obtained in the sample. For this test, the Cronbach’s
alpha was used; the alpha value is 0.8982, which is much higher than the
minimum acceptable level suggested by Nunnally (1978). Several statistical
analytical techniques such as Factor Analysis, Multiple Regression Analysis,
and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) were used to measure the level of quality
education offered by the private educational institutions in Bangladesh. In
order to measure the cost of education, the weighted average method was
applied. The scale was converted 7 to +3, 6 to +2, 5 to +1, 4 to 0, 3 to –1, 2
to –2; and 1 to –3. The computed weighted average value for the particular
variable would indicate the particular level of significance. As per this
method, a higher value is assigned for greater weight.
Conceptual Framework
This
study investigated the factors affecting quality education in the private universities
in Bangladesh. In total, six independent determinants related to both human
resources and organisational factors have been identified that are likely to Mohammad
A. Ashraf et al. 24
affect the quality of higher education offered to the
students of Bangladesh. The independent factors are faculty credentials, classroom
facilities, the academic calendar, campus facilities, research facilities and
the cost of education. Faculty credentials are important in assuring
high-quality education. By and large, the faculty’s main function is to equip
students with the pragmatic knowledge that is most necessary for and suitable
in the current and emerging new age of science and technology. In fulfilling
this function, educational entities must inevitably hire and retain talented
teachers. For this reason, Hensel (1991) emphasises talented faculty members
and maintained that the well-being of the university depends on its ability to
recruit and retain a talented faculty.
The
wellbeing of any nation as a whole depends on the ability to develop a happy, emotionally
healthy, and productive next generation. According to Bowen and Schuster (1986:
3), “The excellence of higher education is a function of the kind of
people it is able to enlist and retain on its faculties.” Thus, all these
scholarly qualities of the faculties need to be ensured in order to secure
quality of education in the universities. Higher education is by its nature a
developmental environment (Rowley, 1996). Classroom facilities are important
because they are part of the whole atmosphere of learning, which includes
elements such as modern teaching aids as well as neat and clean space that is
adequate in terms of class size and temperature environment. In Bangladesh,
most of the private universities are established via rental, and classroom
space is alarmingly inadequate.
This factor is, thus, important in evaluating
the satisfaction level of the students. The academic calendar is another factor
that is extremely important in the context of the private universities of
Bangladesh. In most cases, the semester is irregular and there is no tight
schedule, which affect the students in terms of the proper planning of their studies,
which in turn negatively affects the quality of their education. As mentioned
earlier, almost all private universities (with few exceptions) are founded on
rented space and buildings; campus facilities such as academically suitable
building infrastructure, extensive library facilities, dormitory facilities, canteen
facility, sports and recreational facilities, computer laboratories with high speed
internet access and transport systems are extremely limited. This factor influences
the overall learning of the students, which affects the quality of their education.
In a similar fashion, research facilities are also underdeveloped. Most of the
universities do not have research bureaus, and publication facilities are also limited,
as indicated by the fact that only four or five journals are published among
more than 50 private universities in Bangladesh.
Due to the lack of adequate reference
materials in the libraries, the teachers and the students Jurnal Pendidik
dan Pendidikan, Jil. 24, 17–32, 2009 25 Figure 2. Conceptual
framework for quality education at private universities in Bangladesh face
enormous problems (Alam et al., 2007). Clearly the variable of campus facilities
has an important impact on the overall quality of education in these higher learning
centres of Bangladesh. The cost of education in private universities in Bangladesh
is also an important concern where, about 42% to 45% of households live under
the absolute poverty line (Alam et al., 2007). Only rich parents can consider
paying the high fees and other costs of studies for their children. In exchange
for high tuition fees and other costs, the students that come from affluent
families expect to receive highquality education from these private universities.
However, the private universities in fact spend most of their funds on renting
for the campus buildings (Alam et al., 2007) instead of on high salaries to
attract the highly qualified faculty members. As a result, there exist serious
questions about the quality of the education offered at these universities.
Conceptual Framework Independent Variables Dependent Variable Faculty
Credentials Classroom Facilities Academic Calendar Campus Facilities Research
Facilities Cost Education Quality Education Mohammad A. Ashraf et al. 26
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATIONS
A
principal component factor analysis was conducted on the 36 variables related
to quality and cost of education. This analysis yielded a 7-factor solution
that explained 53% of the variance as represented in Table 1. The factor
analysis shows that faculty credentials, campus facilities and research
facilities are important to students in their judgments regarding quality
education. Thus, focusing on these factors would enable universities to achieve
quality in private education. The first factor, faculty credentials, which
account for the most variance (24.56%), consists of five control variables. The
five variables contained in this key factor are: faculty’s academic background,
teaching experience, updated course content, communication skills and fair treatments
to students. The factor loading points for these variables are considerably
higher than 60.
Hence,
policymakers at private universities should be more concerned about these
variables if they wish to increase education quality in higher education
programs. The second most important factor is classroom facilities, which
explains 7.02% of the variation in students’ evaluations of education quality.
This factor includes learning atmosphere, modern teaching aids, air-conditioned
rooms, spacious rooms, and neat and clean rooms. The factor loading points for
these variables are also higher than 60 except for the element “air-conditioned
room.” Thus, the classroom facilities are significant in explaining the quality
of education at the private universities. The third most important factor is
the academic calendar. Variables included in this component are maintaining
strict schedules, make-up class provisions, an automated registration process,
and the timely completion of registration. The factor loading points are also
substantially higher, which shows the simply significant level of student
judgment important for determining quality education. The fourth most important
factor is campus facilities, which accounts for 4.54% of the variance and
broadly covers well-equipped and modern independent campus facilities. The
specific variables are modern campus buildings, transport, dormitory
facilities, dining facilities, recreation and gym facilities, high-speed Internet
access, an extensive library, and computer lab facilities. The factors of
research facilities and cost of education are also important, as each one
explains variation of close to 4%. Thus, the results show that the private universities
as a whole should be more careful with regard to the identified Quality
Education Management 27
CONCLUSION
Private education
in Bangladesh is getting more competitive with the remarkable increase in the
number of academic institutions in the country. The ineluctable forces of
globalization in this new millennium make this growth path more complex and
challenging. Despite the relentless and continuous effort of private educational
institutions, quality has not yet achieved at the desired level. The cost of
private education is another dimension to consider, as it is unaffordable in Bangladesh,
and more effort needs to be made if costs are to be lowered. However, the
system is proceeding gradually towards greater improvement. Nevertheless, all the
problems considered here should be addressed more rigorously to ensure the
quality of education in Bangladesh reaches the desired level. This study has
shed the light on the dimensions perceived by students as associated with the
quality of education. These dimensions are faculty credentials, the academic
calendar, campus facilities, research facilities and the cost of education. The
study also concludes that, in general, the cost of education in private universities
in Bangladesh is somewhat expensive due to the imbalance between increasing
tuition fees and an increasing amount of financial aid and scholarships. Quality
Education Management 31
REFERENCES
Alam, M., Haque, M. S. and Siddiqui, S. F. (2007). Private
higher education in Bangladesh. Research papers. Paris: International
Institute for Education Planning.
Aminuzzaman, S. (2007). Overview of quality
assurance in the context of Bangladesh. Paper presented in a workshop
organised by American International University Bangladesh, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Andaleeb, S. S. (2003). Rejuvenating the
Nation’s Higher Education System. Proceeding of the workshop organised by
International University of Business Agriculture and Technology, Dhaka,
Bangladesh.
Bowen, H. R. and Schuster, J. H. (1986). American
professors: A national resource imperiled. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Chowdhury, I. G. (2004). Foreword. Management
Forum 2004, April, 3–4. Cornesky, R. (1991). Implementing total
quality management in Higher Education. Madison, WI: Magnar Publications.
Coombs, P. H. (1985). The world crises in
education: The view from the eighties. New York: Oxford University Press.
Dhali, S. K. (1999). Measurement and evaluation
in education. Dhaka: Pravati Library.
Ewell, P. T. (1991). Assessment and TQM: In search
of convergence. New Directions for Institutional Research, 18, 39–52.
Further Education Unit (FEU). (1991). Quality
matters: Business and industry quality models and further education.
London: FEU.
Gordon, G. and Partington, P. (1993). Quality in
higher education: overview and update. Briefing Paper 3. Sheffield:
University Staff Development Unit, University of Sheffield.
Haque, M. S. (2004). Quality management issues in
business education in Bangladesh: A synoptic review based on Canadian and
European papers, Management Forum 2004, April, 1 10.
Hart, C and Shoolbred, M. (1993). Organizational
culture, rewards and quality in higher education. Quality Assurance in
Education, 1, 22–29.
Hensel, N. (1991). Realizing gender equality in
higher education: The need to integrate work/family issues. ASHE-ERIC
Higher Education Report no. 2. Washington, DC: School of Education and
Human Development, George Washington University. Mohammad A. Ashraf et al. 32
Kabir, N. (2006). Private universities: An
analytical assessment. The Daily New Age, 10–11.
Kotler, P. (2003). Marketing management.
Delhi: Pearson Education Inc.
Lamanga, C. Z. (2002). Strategic view of the
development of Higher Education:
Bangladesh AIUB perspective. Dhaka:
A1 Publication.
_________. (2006). Quality assurance in tertiary education:
Bangladesh experience. Paper presented at the World Bank Learning Seminar,
18–20 June, CIEP, France.
Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement
of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140, 55–60.
Marchese, T. (1991). TQM reaches the academy. AHHE–Bulletin,
44, 3–9.
Murgatroyd, S. and Morgan, C. (1994). Total
quality management in the public sector: An international perspective, Buckingham,
Philadelphia: Open University Press. Nunnally, J. L. (1978). Psychometric
theory. New York: McGraw Hill-Company.
Oxford. (2003). The Oxford compact english
dictionary. New York: Oxford University Press.
Rowley, J. (1996). Motivation and academic staff in
higher education. Quality Assurance in Education, 4, 11–16.
Sabur, M. A. (2004). Dhaka University verses
private university: A comparative analysis of quality of education offered by
the institutions. BSS diss., University of Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Schein, E. H. (1980). Organizational psychology.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Spanbauer, S. J. (1992). A quality system for
education. Milwaukee, WI: ASQC Quality Press.
University Grants Commission. (2008). Annual Report
2008. Dhaka: University Grants Commission.
World Bank (1995). Priorities and strategies for
education. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Dikutip :
Ashraf, M. A., Ibrahim, Y., &
Joarder, M. H. (2009). Quality education management at private universities in
Bangladesh: An Exploratory Study. Jurnal Pendidik dan Pendidikan, 24,
17-32.
Alamat Web Site :
http://scholar.google.co.id/scholar?hl=id&q=jurnal+of+education+filetype%3Apdf&btnG=
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar