Search results

Faced with the existential threat of COVID-19, the College of Business Administration (CBA) at Princess Nourah Bint Abdulrahman University (PNU) decided to work toward the dual goals to achieve accreditation and an effective social and educational response to the pandemic. CBA’s quality improvement process was implemented synergistically with Seligman’s (2011) PERMA well-being model, namely positive emotions, engagement, relationship, meaning, and accomplishment/achievement. The case study methodology, which was based on direct observations, faculty and students’ interviews, surveys, feedback, documents, and archival data records, allowed to capture the context and lived reality of all the participants in QAA processes. Results showed that quality improvement was facilitated through three domains: (1) governance and academic leadership, (2) teaching and learning, and (3) digitalization and technology. Within each domain, specific programs, activities, human resources, and networks were enabled through a framework based on the PERMA well-being model. As a result of this hybrid QAA well-being implementation process, CBA achieved NCAAA accreditation for its offered programs, while experiencing high levels of well-being and commitment to teaching and learning by the staff members and students. The description of CBA’s accreditation journey might be insightful for other higher education institutions (HEIs).

Although educators would likely agree that values and ethics are important in all disciplines, they have particular importance for practice-oriented fields. These applied professionals need to solve complex social problems that require the application of ethical standards and value perspectives. While the importance of value-engaged practice is known to the applied field, there is little research and conversation about how values can be integrated into teaching. This chapter synthesizes values-education approaches in various practice-based disciplines such as public administration (PA), program evaluation, social work, and public health. This chapter draws from empirical and theoretical works as well as the authors' experiences developing, participating in, and conducting values-based research on professionals and professional education.

This chapter provides an in-depth examination of the quality assurance process in the higher education system of Iraq and the Kurdistan Region of Iraq (KRI) in terms of standards, processes, and procedures. More specifically, the chapter aims to examine the impact of the quality assurance process on the quality development of education in Iraq and Kurdistan Region, as well as identify the challenges that staff (top management and faculty members) face at various higher education institutions therein. For this purpose, a qualitative/quantitative analysis was conducted, which involved reviewing existing official policies, reports, and forms; interviewing top officials (presidents, vice-presidents, quality assurance directors) at a few higher education institutions (public and private); and developing a survey questionnaire that detected the perspective of top officials and faculty members regarding the level of impact quality assurance has had on the development of higher education. A total of 284 university staff members were surveyed from different universities in Iraq and Kurdistan. A total of 29 universities from Iraq and Kurdistan were represented in the survey. The respondents came from a variety of colleges and departments at public and private universities, with 79% of respondents coming from public universities. Study results demonstrate that quality assurance has contributed significantly to the improvement of university staff performance. There are a number of recommendations made within this chapter for educational leaders, which could lead to the further development of quality practices and the upgrading of the higher education system.

Increased emphasis on offering quality education underscores the need for developing a rigorous process for assessing academic programs in higher education. In this chapter, we develop a practical and rigorous framework for comprehensive assessment of academic programs. This framework generates in-depth communication between the academic departments and the university administration. It provides a useful tool for advancing the university mission, setting priorities, allocating resources, and identifying future areas of potential growth. This data-driven framework covers a wide range of qualitative and quantitative variables. To ensure a smooth and efficient implementation of the assessment process we present the critical stages in the development of a successful program assessment framework − from determining the assessment criteria, establishing the organizational climate, appointing the assessment committee, preparing program self-studies, to collecting and analyzing data. We present real examples from the author’s home institution to illustrate and support the reader’s understanding of the framework.

This chapter proposes authentic leadership as a generic competence and an integral part of doctoral education regardless of field of study. The authors explore its potential to enhance the development of doctoral candidates and academics and search for answers to the questions: Can and should authentic leadership be developed as a generic competence in doctoral education? How can it be designed and implemented in a doctoral training module? What would its learning outcomes be? The authors address these questions in the context of doctoral education. They assert that authentic leadership training should be mandatory for all doctoral candidates, and that supervisors should be actively engaged in the development of this underappreciated transferrable skill.

In an ever-interconnected world dominated by discourses on the internationalization and marketization of higher education, concerns related to language and employability have been the focus of recent debates. There is, however, a dearth of research investigating how these dimensions relate to one another in recent comparative and international higher education research. By focusing on how issues related to language and employability have been presented in recent higher education research worldwide, this chapter aims to contribute to our understanding of this concern. To achieve this goal, we conducted a scoping literature review using the Web of Science, Scopus, and the Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) databases, considering the years 2011–2020. The findings, perhaps not surprisingly, suggested that language skills are perceived to be valued by both graduates and employers though the discussions predominantly focused on one language, English. The research focus on English for employability in Anglophone contexts is understandable. However, the fact that the trend is observed in contexts where the language is not the primary or official language seems to indicate the influence of internationalization of higher education and global labor markets primarily dominated by English. The literature also suggested that (English) language training in higher education programs needs to move from solely linguistic and qualification-related content areas to a broader sphere of English for communication purposes that cover both specialized disciplinary content and broader generic employability skills. Considering this finding, we suggest that higher education systems and institutions incorporate recent developments in English for occupational purposes in their curriculum. We also recommend that there needs to be a shift from the overwhelmingly English language-dominated discussions to more inclusive research that assesses the impact of other dominant languages on employability-related concerns.

This chapter begins with a brief overview of various sources of truth, including authority figures, faith, science, reason and experience. Although all sources of truth are recognized as valid, science is particularly valuable because of its relative objectivity. Therefore, the balance of the chapter describes three major sources of empirical information about college student mental health. First, the Center for Collegiate Mental Health (CCMH) is discussed, followed by the Healthy Minds Study (HMS) and then the National College Health Assessment. The latter two are national surveys of college students, whereas CCMH only collects data from students receiving mental health services. The HMS, like CCMH, gathers data specific to college students’ mental health; the National College Health Assessment, which is conducted by the American College Health Association, collects information on college students’ physical and mental health. Taken together, these three sources of data provide the basis for comparisons between college students who are and are not receiving mental health services, allow for determinations of trends in college student mental health and serve as the basis for hundreds of studies on the prevalence, causes, correlates and consequences of college students’ mental health.

This chapter contributes to the scholarship of teaching and learning in extracurricular enterprise and entrepreneurship education. It draws on research from two annual ‘Business Challenge Weeks’ (BCW) held at Oxford Brookes University in 2021 and 2022, in which teams of postgraduate students from three faculties worked on external client projects, supported by an academic mentor. It presents and discusses findings derived from a survey and interviews conducted after the second of these years. The chapter takes a transdisciplinary perspective, after Budwig and Alexander (2020), Piaget (1972) and Klein et al. (2001) and explores the relationship between this and the enterprise and entrepreneurship development pipeline set out by QAA (2018). It analyses the experiences of the three main participating groups engaged in the challenge weeks – students, external clients and academic mentors – and explores the organising challenges inherent in multiparty pedagogical initiatives. The chapter contributes to knowledge in this area by revealing and reflecting on the motivations and expectations of the three participant groups, the roles they played during the week and the outcomes they reported. It also expands understanding of transdisciplinary enterprise pedagogy.

As universities grapple with the question of how to prepare students for increasingly uncertain futures, the development of evidence-based frameworks to guide academic program¹ design is critical. Here, we propose a strategic framework with a high impact on program design, implementation, and evaluation as well as mentoring and support for academic program leaders. High impact can be achieved when program leaders are enabled to embed key future-focused capabilities and skills across the curriculum in a program. In order to ensure that these capabilities are systematically and cohesively embedded in students’ learning journeys, we suggest that academic program leaders (e.g., Directors of Studies, Subject Area Coordinators, etc.) require strategic approaches to program design, implementation, and evaluation, as well as mentoring and support. Such approaches would ensure that high impact practices are consistently employed, rather than being the exception in isolated courses.² At Queensland University of Technology, we have developed a holistic model to support “whole-of-program” design for award programs across faculties and disciplines, in a coherent and strategic way. The model we use is based on a framework for curriculum design called the Future Focused Curriculum Design Framework (FFCF), and is an iterative model that places learners at the center of their learning to enable meaningful change to the design of programs. The adoption of the framework is supported by curriculum design studios situated within each discipline-specific faculty,³ which are made up of curriculum and learning designers, working closely with academics in different faculties. A key element of the process is that curriculum design studios enable relationships and communities to develop (Wenger et al., 2002), which in turn allows for contextualized practice. This holistic model supports whole-of-program design for award programs, in a coherent and strategic way and enables communities of practice to emerge in an iterative manner. In this chapter, we share our experiences with using this model and the impacts it has achieved, and we reflect on ways it be adapted for future use and in other contexts.

The involvement of stakeholders such as employers, alumni, and students has always been considered a key element in improving the higher education (HE) system. While considering stakeholders as key players in serving the market and in improving HE instruction, a two-sided collaborative involvement should aim at satisfying the mutual interests and overcoming existing barriers. Quality assurance systems have always supported crossing these barriers to link with the external stakeholders. However, many of the external quality assurance agencies (EQA) in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region specify a group of external holders, limiting the various types of key stakeholders needed to enhance the academic programs. On the other hand, there are encountered risks in involving stakeholders if left with no objective guidance, especially that quality agencies are formidably urging the universities to consider the external stakeholders’ inputs to satisfy the quality assurance standards. The main objective of this chapter is to investigate the types of stakeholders’ and their levels of involvement within the local higher education institutions (HEIs). The chapter aims to provide an insight to invest in this involvement and utilize it to further improve the programs and their graduate attributes and suggests actions that would proficiently and truly enhance the involvement of external stakeholders. The outcomes of this chapter are expected to guide the EQAs and the HEIs to develop new practices in involving stakeholders, such as curriculum input, collegiate internships, aligning graduate attributes to market needs, financial support through endowments, professional development, and partnerships in service-level agreements.