Academics’ Professionalism and Quality Mechanisms: Challenges and Tensions

1. Academics’ Professionalism and Quality Mechanisms: Challenges and Tensions DrMING CHENG University of Brighton, England

2. Rationale for the study • Quality audit is a controversy Excessive control over academics (Morley, 2003); re-shape academics’ conditions of work; regulate academics’ conduct, change the way they conceptualize themselves (Shore & Wright, 2000). • Debates on academic work as a profession (Halsey, 1992; Henkel, 2000; Wilson, 1979).

3. Objective of my research • To explore whether academics perceived their work as a profession; how their perceived professionalism affected their attitudes towards quality audit.

4. Quality audit • Refers to not only Institutional Audit of the QAA, but a culture of using audit as assessment method, and the procedure of using different quality mechanisms to assure and enhance quality of teaching and learning

5. Research methods • In-depth case study of a university in England • Interpretative research paradigm • Document analysis • 64 interviews with academics • 30 interviews via emails

6. Interpretations of profession • Part of an official occupational classification scheme, used to protect an occupation group from the forces of competition and to improve its economic position and its social prestige (Larson, 1977) • A specialised occupation, with its specialized knowledge and skills required to perform different tasks in a division of labour (Freidson, 2001; Williams, 2008) • A particular occupation which is special in its power in establishing and maintaining its control over work (Johnson, 1972)

7. Attributes of traditional profession • Features of a monopoly, control over who practices, moral integrity, adherence to code of practice, special expertise, and expert service (Freidson, 2001; Johnson, 1972; Larson, 1977).

8. Academic work as a profession Professions and academe have developed closely together within Western traditions • Traditional professions develop from universities; professional ethos for academics has deep roots; academic work has the attributes of a profession, such as special expertise, moral integrity and control over who practices (Wilson, 1979)

9. Interviewee’s perception of being professionals • Being recognized and accredited by professional body or being a member of that body • 3 most widely accepted features: the possession of skills that require a high level of education and qualifications; commitment to standards and rules set by discipline; and freedom to determine their own work practice

10. Compare academics’ professionalism with that of traditional profession • High levels of education and qualifications indicate that academic work has a knowledge base that requires a lengthy period of apprenticeship (Wilson, 1979). • Commitment to standards and rules set by discipline can be perceived as one principle embodied in the codes of the profession to ensure that academic professionals meet the high standards expected in their work (Freidson, 2001); academic work has authority and academics manage their own teaching through recognition of a standard/conduct that governs the exercise of knowledge and skill (Wilson, 1979).

11. Perceived tension between academic professionalism and quality audit • Distrust of academics • Time cost of audit procedure • Bureaucracy of audit

12. Perceived distrust of academics by the audit • 1/3 interviewees felt that the external check of the audit on their work, especially the Institutional Audit of the QAA, was a symbol that they were not trusted. • Produced a fear that the audit was a fault finding exercise,academics, departments/schools, and universities concealed their mistakes and problems when Institutional Audit occurred

13. Example of perceived distrust • A head of school of science-related course described the Institutional Audit process as “jumping through a hoop” … If you will, it is a hoop to jump through. It is not something that you would say that fantastic, and they come and run, … so the school is forced into a defensive position when they come to the quality assurance. (15) Implications: a lack of trust between academics and the Institutional Audit, and academics treated the audit as a game

14. Perceived time cost of audit procedures • Audit used an administrative measure to judge the quality of teaching and learning in the university, but respondents perceived this measure as paperwork rather than good teaching practice. • 20 interviewees argued against the large amount of time and money spent in preparing for the Audit, because it had not produced a benefit which compensated for the heavy administrative burdens.

15. Example of perceive time cost The … real conflict I see is time - time to ensure that quality audit is satisfied is time potentially lost to other professional duties. (Respondent 37) Implication: priority of academics was research and teaching, they did not want to spend time doing the audit related tasks

16. Perceived bureaucracy of quality audit • Bureaucracy originally was meant to be an efficient system of administration with impersonal recruitment and run as a hierarchy, using a set of precisely written rules (Roth & Wittich, 1968). • Interviewees used the term ‘bureaucracy’/’bureaucratic’ as a label for tasks they did not want to do, such as audit related work, and administrative jobs.

17. Perceived bureaucracy of peer observation • 5 out of 8 quality mechanisms studied were marked as bureaucratic by the respondents (Peer Observation, IA,APR,ASNRP,NSS). • Hard to relate peer observation to a bureaucratic practice, because it is a peer-to-peer process, mainly involved academics observing their peers’ lectures and then offering suggestions for enhancement as well as filling in the necessary forms.

18. Changes among academics • 14 interviewees: regular review and self-evaluation was part of professional activity; meeting requirements of audit was a matter of accountability, not distrust. • Acknowledgement of importance of accountability among 5 academics and 4 manager academics: be accountable for their funding and their salaries.

19. Implication: Academic community in a dilemma • Perceived tension suggests that academic community closed their door when facing external assessment, in order to maintain professional control of their work. • A minor cultural change regarding how to perceive quality audit and how to cooperate with the audit process suggests a tendency to perceive accountability as a professional responsibility • Questions: will the academic community move towards this change, and how???

20. References • Cheng, M. (2009) (in press). Changing Academics: Quality Audit and its Perceived Impact. Saarbrücken, Germany: VDM Publishing House Ltd.