Review by: Wirth, Markus (2004-09-13)

Starting with a description of the various elements that create a considerable pressure on higher education to improve its performance, Srikanthan & Dalrymple develop a sound understanding of what a holistic approach of quality management could mean for higher education institutions.

The authors start their article by having a look at the controversially discussed compatibility of total quality management (TQM) with the measures of higher education. By citing various studies, they show that the adoption of TQM in the higher education sector is more like a myth and an illusion than reality. But despite all doubts, they also see a huge potential for TQM to be at least part of a more holistic approach to quality. In developing a holistic model for quality management in higher education the authors make a clear distinction between two core function areas: services (like administrative activities, enrolment, library, cafeterias) and education. TQM is seen as extremely powerful to tackle challenges in the service area but rather weak in respect to educational matters. Hence, the authors propose a composite model that combines elements form TQM and from other educational models to a more holistic approach. To build up the background for such a more holistic approach, four different educational quality models (Transformative Model, Engagement Model of Programme Quality, University of Learning Model, Model for a Responsive University) are introduced and briefly discussed. This very helpful background resume reveals some central insights. All discussed models show a common thrust on student learning experience when making judgements about quality. Furthermore, all models put great emphasise on collaboration at the education delivery level. This finally let’s the authors conclude that a holistic approach incorporating the essence of central educational models should be feasible. A critical questioning of the comparison also reveals some weak points: The authors are implicitly comparing educational models that relate to different levels (course, programme, institutional and educational system level) and as a consequence most of the ascertained differences are simply rooted in the different focus levels. But however, the authors succeed in making their point very clear: talking about a more holistic approach to quality and quality management in higher education means to integrate and balance ideals of the educational, service and behavioural excellence ethos . Implementing this holistic approach needs, so the authors, a shared vision that has to be built up by an extensive dialogue, including guiding ideas, theories, methods and tools. This is the way how the authors see a possibility to bridge today’s dichotomy of educational vs. organisational theories.

This article is easy to read and gives the reader a useful conception on quality in higher education and what it could mean to build up a more holistic quality concept.