mónica urigüen tesis completa

1

1

ATTRIBUTES OF QUALITY PROGRAMS

IN UNIVERSITIES IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES:

CASE STUDIES OF TWO PRIVATE

UNIVERSITIES IN ECUADOR AND BEYOND

By

Mónica I. Urigüen,

Doctor of Philosophy

(Educational Leadership and Policy Analysis)

at the

UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON

2005

2

2

ABSTRACT

This study sought to identify the key attributes of high-quality programs with an eye

toward helping developing countries such as Ecuador advance program quality.

The dissertation is divided into five chapters: 1) studying high-quality programs; 2)

literature review of attributes of high-quality programs; 3) method, to identify program

attributes that influence student learning outcomes, I used grounded theory; 4) findings

(the data for this qualitative study came from 60 interviewees); and 5) conclusions and

recommendations.

Attributes of High-Quality Programs

Cluster One Highly

Qualified

Participants

Cluster Two

Learning-Centered

Cultures

Cluster Three

Interactive Teaching

and Learning

Cluster Four

Connected Program

Requirements

Cluster Five

Adequate Resources

1. Highly

Qualified

Faculty

2. Highly

Qualified

Students

3. Shared Program

Direction

Focused on

Learning

4. Real-World

Learning

Experiences

5. Reading-

Centered

Culture

6. Supportive and

Risk-Taking

Environment

7. Integrative

learning: Theory

with Practice,

Self with

Subject

8. Exclusive

Tutoring and

Mentoring

9. Planned Breadth

and Depth

Course Work

10. Tangible

Products

11. Support for

Students

12. Support for

Faculty

13. Support for

Campus

Infrastructure

While I used grounded theory, my study was guided by Haworth and Conrad‘s (1997)

―Engagement Theory of High-Quality Programs.‖ Eleven of the attributes of high-

quality programs are closely connected to Haworth and Conrad‘s theory and the other

two attributes—real-world learning experiences and a reading-centered culture—make

the signature theoretical contributions of my study. Real-world learning experiences

encourage the active involvement of stakeholders in designing curricula with real-world

3

3

learning experiences that result in positive student outcomes. The second attribute—a

reading-centered culture—has never before been identified in the literature.

There are four key differences between Haworth and Conrad‘s theory and the theory

developed in this study. In my theory, I found that four key attributes are even more

important in Ecuador and, possibly, other developing countries: highly-qualified

faculty, highly-qualified students, reading-centered cultures, and real-world learning

experiences.

If Latin American universities implement my recommendations, particularly in

Ecuadorian universities, I envision a better future for our universities. That is, Latin

American universities will become accountable to society by guaranteeing their students

high-quality programs, which will assure more sustainable development within each

country.

CONTENTS

Preface…………………………………………………………………………………v

Acknowledgements ……………………………………………………………………vi

Chapter One

Introduction.………………………………………………………………………

High-Quality Programs in Higher Education: Program Quality Matters……………

Purpose of This Study…………………………………………………………………

Past and Present University Education in Latin America…………………………….

Higher Education in Developing Countries ………………………………………….

Higher Education in Latin American Universities since the 1980s…………………..

Integration Process of Latin American Universities………………………………….

Move toward More Liberal Education………………………………………………..

Recent Efforts to Improve Quality Programs in Latin American Universities……….

Ecuadorian Universities: Reforms and Changes………………………………………

Chapter Two

Literature Review……………………………………………………………………

4

4

Conceptualizations of Quality …………………………………………………

Views and the Major Attributes of High-Quality Programs………………………….

The Engagement Theory of High-Quality Programs…………………………………

Actions to Implement the Attributes of the Engagement Theory…………………….

a. Cluster One: Diverse and Engaged Participants…………………………

b. Cluster Two: Participatory Cultures……………………………………

c. Cluster Three: Interactive Teaching and Learning………………………

d. Cluster Four: Connected Program Requirements………………………

e. Cluster Five: Adequate Resources……………………………………………

A Framework for Developing and Sustaining High-Quality Programs………………

Curricula Planning and Assessment Matter in High-Quality Programs………………

Assessing Quality Programs…………………………………………………………..

Review of the Literature on Quality Programs in Developing Countries…………….

Quality Education for Al………………………………………………………………

Quality Programs in Ecuador………………………………………………………….

Forces that Influence the Ecuadorian Higher Education System………………………

a. External Forces…………………………………………………………………

b. Internal Forces………………………………………………………………….

Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………

Chapter Three

Method…………………………………………………………………………………

Purpose of The Study…………………………………………………………………...

Method…………………………………………………………………………………

Grounded Theory………………………………………………………………………

Multicase Study Design………………………………………………………………..

Interview Process………………………………………………………………………

Trustworthiness………………………………………………………………………

Further Tasting of the Attributes of High-Quality Programs ………………………….

Sampling Strategy and Procedures……………………………………………………...

Theoretical Sensitivity………………………………………………………………….

Ethics……………………………………………………………………………………

Selection of Programs…………………………………………………………………..

Selection of Interviewees within Programs…………………………………………….

5

5

Participants……………………………………………………………………………..

Data Analysis…………………………………………………………………………..

Interview Process and Protocols……………………………………………………….

Interview Questions……………………………………………………………………

Field Notes Taking……………………………………………………………………..

Limitations of This Study……………………………………………………………….

Chapter Four

Findings………………………………………………………………………………..

Attributes of High-Quality Programs in Latin American Universities

and in Ecuadorian Universities (Actions and Positive Outcomes)…………………

Cluster One: Highly Qualified and Engaged Participants:……………………………

- Highly Qualified Faculty……………………………………………………………

- Highly Qualified Students…………………………………………………………

Cluster Two: Learning-Centered Cultures…………………………

- Shared Program Direction Focused on Learning………

- Real-World Learning Experiences…………………………………………

- Reading-Centered Culture…………………………………………………………

- Supportive and Risk-Taking Environments…………………

Cluster Three Interactive Teaching and Learning…

- Integrative Learning: Theory with Practice, Self with Subject………………

- Exclusive Tutoring and Mentoring…………………………………………………

Cluster Four: Connected Program Requirements……………………

- Planned Breadth and Depth Course Work…………………………………

- Tangible Products…………………………………………………………

Cluster Five: Adequate Resources…………………

- Support for Students ……………………………………………

- Support for Faculty……………………………………………………

- Support for Campus Infrastructure………………

Chapter Five

Conclusions and Recommendations………………………………………………

Support for the Theory in the Literature…………………………………………….

Contributions of the Theory of High-Quality Programs…………………………….

6

6

High-Quality Programs in Latin American Universities: Key Differences in Mission of

the Universities and the Attributes of Quality Programs ……………………………

Recommendations……………………………………………………………………

Appendix A:

Attributes of High Quality in Latin American and in Ecuadorian Universities……..

University-Wide Educational Leadership

Cluster One: University Wide Educational Leadership………………………………

Interdisciplinary Problem-Base Research Teams……………………………………

Solid Connections between Society and the University ..…………

Conclusion and Recommendations ..…………………………………………………

Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………...vii

List of Tables

Table 1: Five Clusters and Seventeen Attributes of High-Quality Program……

Table 2: Criteria for Evaluating Academic Programs……………………………

Table 3: Ecuadorian Universities in Light of Turbulent External and Internal

Environments…………………………………………………………

Table 4: Interviewees that Participated in this Study…………………………

Table 5: Attributes of High-Quality Programs in Latin American

and in Ecuadorian Universities……………………………………………

Table 6: Attributes of High-Quality Higher Education Institutions

In Latin America and in Ecuadorian Universities ……………………

7

7

PREFACE

What does quality mean in terms of higher education? What attributes are found in

high-quality programs? How can universities in developing countries, especially in

Ecuador, advance quality programs? This dissertation sought to identify the key

attributes of high-quality programs with an eye toward helping developing countries

such as Ecuador advance program quality.

The dissertation is divided into five chapters. The first chapter advances the need for

studying high-quality programs, especially in universities in developing countries such

as in Ecuador. The first chapter also provides an overview of the higher education

system in Latin America and in Ecuador. The second chapter provides a literature

review of attributes of high-quality programs. The third chapter describes the qualitative

research method that I used in my research. In order to identify program attributes that

influence student learning outcomes, I used grounded theory, an inductive approach in

which a theory is generated based on the data I collected. Like Haworth and Conrad

(1997), I used a ―positioned subject‖ approach that grounded my research in the

perspectives of diverse stakeholders (administrators, faculty, students, alumni, and

employers). Chapter four presents my findings. The data for this qualitative study came

from 60 interviewees: 48 interviewees were from Ecuador, one interviewee was from

United States, and 11 interviewees were from other Latin American countries. The

interviews were conducted at two different times in two different countries: in Ecuador

during December 2001 and January 2002, and in Costa Rica during June and July 2003.

The fifth chapter advances my conclusions and recommendations.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I offer my sincere thanks to all those persons in universities and private spheres who

allowed me to wander into their lives. Their reflections on the attributes of high-quality

programs are what made this dissertation inspiring to write. Also, I must thank my dear

husband, Cesar, and my beloved children Edgar, Melany, and Karina, for their constant

emotional support and encouragement to culminate this important stage of our lives.

Being far from them and from home has not been an easy experience; however, through

8

8

this process we all have grown stronger. I want to acknowledge the support of my

family because their care has been the key factor in completing my Ph.D. In addition, I

would like to express my appreciation to my relatives and friends for caring for my

family while I was away from home. I especially thank my mother and father.

I would like to express my appreciation to Professor Clifton Conrad, my dissertation

director, for his insightful teaching, constructive criticisms, and editing on my

dissertation; and to the other members of my dissertation committee: Professor Alan

Knox, Professor Allen Phelps, Professor Jerlando Jackson, and Professor Diana

Frantzen.

Finally, I am grateful to the following institutions that participated in my study: The

Ecuadorian Higher Education Council (CONESUP), Universidad San Francisco de

Quito (USFQ), Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador (PUCE), and my

colleagues from PAG1 53, INCAE 2003.

CHAPTER ONE

A movement toward increasing the quality and accountability of Ecuadorian

universities has been fueled by a number of concerns such as decline in the quality of

programs, deteriorating communication within the society and between all higher

education institutions and the State, a rising number of under-prepared students, and the

lack of national and international credibility of Ecuadorian universities.

The animating intent of this study is to contribute to the understanding of high-quality

programs in developing countries, especially in Ecuador.

High-Quality Programs in Higher Education: Program Quality Matters

Why is there a need for quality in higher education? What does program quality have to

do with students‘ development and growth? The principal reason for studying high-

1 PAG: Programa de Alta Gerencia, Costa Rica, INCAE.

9

9

quality programs is that higher education plays a significant role in improving

individual lives as well as society. Therefore, establishing high-quality programs is

critical. Studying quality programs in developing countries is especially important

because the pivotal goal of education is preparing students for roles in which they can

contribute to the development of their societies.

Purpose of This Study

My study was guided by the overall question: What program attributes in universities

in developing countries contribute to positive learning outcomes for students? In regards

to identifying attributes, I addressed two sub-questions:

1. What actions do stakeholders engage in to develop the attributes?

2. What effects do these actions have on improving students‘ learning

outcomes?

Past and Present University Education in Latin America

In Latin America, the first universities were established in the late sixteenth- and early

seventeenth-centuries. For a considerable period of time, universities taught post-

secondary and religious courses. According to the chronicler Diego Vasquez, the first

university of the ―New World‖ was founded in the Dominican Republic in 1583. In

1551, the Universities of Lima and Mexico were founded. In 1586, the first Ecuadorian

university was founded: Universidad de San Fulgencio in Quito. In 1622, the Jesuits

established the Universidad de San Gregorio in Quito. Finally, between 1686 and

1688,2 the Dominicos established the Universidad de Santo Tomás de Aquino in Quito,

(Urigüen, M., 1997: 4). By the end of 17th

century, the ―Old World‖ had only 16

universities. When Harvard College was founded in 1636, Latin America already had 13

universities – a number that rose to 31 after Latin America‘s independence from

Spanish control in the early 19th

Century.

In brief, the colonial university was created within the framework of the cultural policy

imposed by the Spanish Empire. Its mission was to tend to the needs of the crown, the

2 Malo, H. (1984: 30). Hurtado, O. (1992: 19).

10

10

church, and the upper classes of society. Native people were admitted as ―exceptions‖

when they were related to members of the ruling classes.

The Universidades de Salamanca and Alcalá de Henares, the two most famous colonial

Spanish universities, were the models for universities in Latin American countries.

Later, during 1918, the Cordoba Reform Movement took place in Argentina and

established the principle of co-governance.3 Co-governance has arguably restricted the

advance in quality programs because of significant conflicts between university

administration and political leaders.

Independence of Latin America from Spain gave new direction to higher education

based on the revolutionary ideology of the French Revolution and the Napoleonic

Model. Among the key features of the Napoleonic Model and the Cordoba Reform

Movement‘s principles are: 1) the emphasis on professional training; 2) the separation

of teaching from research; 3) open admission; 4) free tuition to all students; and 5) the

centralization of administration or what is known as university bureaucratization.

During the decades after the establishment of the Cordoba Reform Movement, open

admission and free tuition to all students took place at public universities. These two

Cordoba Reform principles resulted in a massive increase in students and subsequent

low quality standards that jeopardized quality programs. To illustrate, in Latin

American universities the number of students increased from 1.6 million students in

1970 to 5.9 million in 1984. The number of students at the Universidad Central in

Quito, the largest university in Ecuador, increased from 11,000 students in 19674 to

43,000 students in 1972 as a result of the student movement that took place at

Universidad de Guayaquil. A similar situation occurred throughout the country.5 ―In

3 Co-governance, a Cordoba principle, is the conception of a university‘s governance equally integrated

by faculty, students, and administrators.

4 On May 29, 1967 the most important student movement toward free admission took place. During that

student movement, 29 students were killed at Casona Universitaria – Universidad de Guayaquil.

5 Uriguen, M. (1997: 16).

11

11

1982 universities had 134,000 students,‖6 and ―by 1994 public universities and

polytechnic schools had more than 220,000 students.‖7

Since 1950, several new private universities have been founded in order to ensure

quality programs that were being jeopardized by open admission and free tuition. Some

of the actions that private universities took to guaranty quality programs were to

implement admission tests and faculty hiring policies aimed at attracting faculty with

outstanding academic credentials.

Simon Schwartzman (1991: 372) presents examples of past and present university

education in Latin America:

Brazil changed its legislation for higher education in 1968, ending with

the traditional chair system and opening the way for graduate

education, the strengthening of academic departments and the creation

of research institutes. Colombia followed similar lines. Chile

introduced a very ambitious project of regulating higher education

through market mechanisms and institutional differentiation in 1981. In

Argentina the military stimulated the creation of new universities in the

provinces, the expansion of non-university tertiary education and the

beginning of a private sector. University autonomy returned with

civilian rule in 1984, and the universities went through a

"normalization" period aimed at returning to the institutional

framework of 1966, which included a policy of open admissions.

Mexico began differentiating after 1968, through both provincial

institutions and a growing private sector.

Higher Education in Developing Countries

6 Grijalva, A. (1994: 126).

7 CONUEP (1994: 17).

12

12

In Latin America, it is important to note that there are often significant differences from

country to country as well as from university to university despite the same colonial

heritage. Some differences can be seen in political, economic, and educational systems,

particularly in higher education systems. To illustrate, Schwartzman (1993: 9-20) says

that one of the main differences within universities is the presence European immigrants

in the history of their higher education systems: ―Places with a strong presence of

European immigrants and linkages, such as Buenos Aires and Sao Paulo, developed

very different, and usually better institutions, than those that remained more isolated,

such as Mexico or Rio de Janeiro.‖ Another important difference has to deal with the

influence of the Church and State and how they have affected higher education. For

example, Mexico, Argentina, and Ecuador among others have large university systems

dominated by a central, national university. If we compare these university systems with

those decentralized systems in Brazil, Colombia, and Chile, we could find historical

differences that may help us to understand the key differences in the universities.

Rolando Arellano (2003) adds that Latin American universities have focused most of

their efforts more on understanding and analysis of knowledge advanced in so-called

―developed counties‖ rather than creating their own theories.

In terms of faculty members in Latin American universities, the expansion of higher

education institutions has led to the hiring of a large number of professors ―who were

different both from the traditional professor (who got his earnings from private practice)

and the researcher (who could raise money from research agencies and research

contracts)… A parallel development was the creation of large administrative

bureaucracies in universities, with their own unions and political agendas‖

(Schwartzman 1993). Consequently, with the increase of public universities and the

number of professors, governments could not afford all the associated high-costs;

therefore, salary levels in public institutions deteriorated, or policies supporting full-

time faculty employment, much less reward structures that recognizes and stimulates

faculty academic achievement.

Rolando Arellano (2003) also points out that there are not many who graduate with a

doctorate degree in Latin America ―(4,229 in 1999 vs 58,747 in the USA in all

majors).‖ If we consider only few examples of Latin American higher education

offering graduate degrees, such as TEC of Monterrey, INCAE, and University of Chile,

13

13

they ―have around 70 Ph.D.s each within their staff‖ (Arellano). But most professors

with graduate degrees working at those institutions have received their diplomas from

United States or European universities.

Higher Education in Latin American Universities since the 1980s

By the end of the 1980s, most military regimes disappeared in Latin America. At the

time, campuses confronted a new challenge in the form of ―economic stagnation.‖

According to UNESCO (2000), most public and private co-financed universities

received funding from the State. In several Latin American universities, particularly in

Ecuador, most faculty have not been earning enough money to devote full-time effort to

their academic pursuits, research, and teaching activities; many need other jobs to

supplement their income, and the quality of teaching has decreased. In Ecuadorian

universities, the financial crisis has resulted in the deterioration of quality. Since

professors have been receiving low salaries, universities are suffering the ―phenomenon

of high mobility, absenteeism, and abandonment of teaching.‖8 To solve this problem

at least partially, non-profit private corporations have been organized by universities to

improve quality standards. To illustrate this point, universities have established

contracts, received and invested money, hired staff, and paid better salaries to professors

in cooperation with non-profit private corporations.

Integration Process of Latin American Universities

According to many observers, Latin America needs to design a development strategy

aimed at a more favorable reintegration of the region in the process of forming

university alliances. In response to this need, the Union of Universities of Latin

America (UDUAL)9 has introduced strategies to assure the integration process of Latin

American universities. UDUAL promotes cultural and academic integration with

8 UNESCO 2002-2003.

9 UDUAL was founded on September 22, 1949, at the First Latin American Meeting in Guatemala.

Currently, UDUAL has more than 160 university members from 22 Latin American countries. UDUAL

has UNESCO´s approval, as a regional advisor.

14

14

democratic principles in Latin American universities. To illustrate, faculty and students

have the opportunity to participate in study abroad academic programs.

Following the international recommendations related to the integration process, Latin

American countries have also established the Latin American Network Alliance for

Quality Assurance and Accreditation (RIACES), which was created in May 2003 in

Buenos Aires, Argentina. RIACES is a network alliance for inter-institutional

cooperation that facilitates studies on Latin American integration via regional or sub-

regional university cooperation in order to develop an integration culture and exchange

of experience related to quality programs.

Move toward More Liberal Education

By the mid-20th

century, a number of Latin American universities chose to advance

liberal education in their academic programs because university authorities believed

there was a compelling need to pursue a more holistic education with a focus on

learning. Currently, liberal education is part of academic programs at first-tier, higher

education institutions. Therefore, only a minor sector of the populace in developing

countries receives general education. Since liberal education has significant impact on

each society, developing countries need leaders with ethics, well-educated alumni, and

trained professionals for industry, academe, and affairs of state, states the World Bank

Report (2000).

The movement toward more liberal education that universities in Latin America are

experiencing coincides with the so-called "university reforms" supported by academic

communities. Currently, these reform processes are aimed more at a redefinition of the

relations between the State, society, and individual universities. The State, society, and

individual universities join together as an academic community aimed at bringing about

a profound transformation of academic programs in developing countries. To illustrate,

in Ecuador, Article 44 of the Higher Education Law states that every academic program

has to introduce subjects from liberal education in order to guarantee higher quality

education.10

10

Ley de Educación Superior y Reglamento General, Ecuador 2002.

15

15

Recent Efforts to Improve Quality in Programs in Latin American Universities

The organization of universities as a system within a regional and sub-regional

integration, the introduction of liberal education within academic programs, and the

expansion and diversification of education for all, are some of the current efforts to

improve quality in academic programs in Latin American universities. To illustrate the

integration process, the Andrés Bello Agreement facilitates credit transfer among Latin

American universities that have improved academic quality. Another illustration of this

academic integration is the new ―distance education systems‖ in Latin America. Some

of the current ―distance education systems‖ or open systems in Latin America include

Universidad Nacional Abierta (UNA) in Venezuela, Universidad Particular Técnica de

Loja in Ecuador, Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED) in Costa

Rica, Unidad Universitaria del Sur in Colombia, distance education system of the

Universities of Brasilia, and UNAM of Mexico. Other recent efforts to improve quality

in programs in Latin American universities are the improvement of teaching-learning

methods, university planning, student-teacher relationships, and budget formulation.

Ecuadorian Universities: Reforms and Changes

Inadequate connections between the universities and the external environment, poor

academic quality, weak management, insufficient funds, and lack of accountability

systems are among the main problems that need to be solved. For these reasons, the

Ecuadorian higher education system is currently undergoing reforms and changes to

improve quality programs.

The Ecuadorian financial crisis is one of the most significant obstacles to attaining high-

quality programs. ―A top-down structural reform of higher education systems may no

longer be possible or appropriate in Ecuador.‖11

In contrast to reforms that are specific,

large-scale, and embedded in law, accreditation and evaluation foster a much different

and potentially more responsive approach to reform. It is much more difficult to change

a law in a country such as Ecuador than it is to enhance the criteria, indicators, and

processes of institutional change and evaluation.

11

Twombly (1997: 7)

16

16

Another significant obstacle in attaining quality programs is the small amount or total

lack of research. According to Jameson (1997: 4 – 7), there has been remarkably little

research done on higher education in Ecuador.

According to Twombly (1999), reforming higher education in Ecuador has been

sporadic and partial because for most universities, reform means curricular change and

most would argue that their universities are already engaged in a reform process.

Among the main reforms to improve quality programs in Ecuadorian universities are: 1)

continual redefinition of the mission and objectives of higher education; 2) creation of a

higher education system; 3) development of closer relations between the universities

and their environment; 4) encouragement of scientific and technological research; 5)

improvement of university leadership within administrations; 6) increase in and

diversification of sources of finances; 7) creation of a national system of evaluation and

accreditation as a means for ensuring accountability; and 8) changes to the current

higher education law.

To advance quality programs, Ecuadorian universities have started in the decade of

1990 a system of evaluation and accreditation, mostly patterned after the United States‘

evaluation systems. The evaluation system is aimed at assessing the following areas:

leadership within administrations, missions, and institutional plans, budgets and finance,

interactions between university and society, research, connected program requirements,

interactive teaching and learning, and adequate resources. Every effort related to reform

and change is being conducted through the ―Ecuadorian Higher Education Council‖

(CONESUP).12

12

According to the Ecuadorian Higher Education Law, Article 11, CONESUP is an autonomous and

public institution responsible for planning, regulating, coordinating, and guiding the Ecuadorian Higher

Education System (universities, polytechnic schools, and technological institutes). CONESUP also

approves the creation of any new higher education institution.

17

17

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter provides a literature review related to attributes of high-quality programs,

especially the literature on quality programs in universities in developed countries.

Conceptualizations of Quality

Not only does it cover three classical functions of Ortega and Gasset:

teaching, research and extension, which amounts to the quality of its

teaching staff, the quality of its program and the quality of its teaching-

learning methods, but it also includes the quality of its students, its

infrastructure and its academic surroundings.

UNESCO, 2002.

According to UNESCO, quality programs take place in a community whose members

are dedicated to academic freedom and are committed to the search for the truth, the

defense and promotion of human rights, democracy, social justice, and tolerance in their

own communities and in the world.

Seymour (1992) refers to quality programs as a day-to-day operating philosophy—a

never-ending quality journey. Seymour & Associates (1996) promote Baldrige, a

performance paradigm, as a robust system that stands in sharp contrast to the ―we-

know-it-when-we-see-it.‖ Baldrige‘s criteria to assess quality programs are: (1)

leadership; (2) information and analysis; (3) strategic and operational planning; (4)

human resource development and management; (5) educational and business process

management; (6) institutional performance results; and (7) student focus and student

and stakeholder satisfaction. Sims and Sims (1995: 8) state: ―The evolving view of

quality programs takes it to mean the degree to which student and other stakeholder

needs and expectations are consistently satisfied.‖ Quisumbing (2002) defines quality

programs as follows:

18

18

A holistic, integrated and humanistic education retains the essential

meaning of Quality: the discovery and development of the talents of

every individual, the full flowering of the human potential, learning to be

a complete human person. After all, educare, the root word of education,

means the bringing forth of the wholeness within each one of us.

Haworth and Conrad (1997: 15) ―broadly define high-quality programs as those which,

from the perspective of diverse stakeholders, contribute to enriching learning

experiences for students that positively affect their growth and development.‖

Views and Attributes of High-Quality Programs

Haworth and Conrad (1997: 3 – 9), in their ―Engagement Theory of Quality,‖ identify

five views of quality: faculty, resource, student quality-and-effort view, curriculum

requirements, and multidimensional/multilevel views.

According to Haworth and Conrad: ―The faculty view enjoys direct empirical support

from studies of the quantitative attributes of ‗high-quality‘ programs insofar as

researchers have found a strong relationship between measures of faculty educational

training and qualification and program quality.‖13

Adequate resources—human, financial, and physical—are the sine qua non of high-

quality programs according to resources view. The resource view is supported both

directly through research on the quantitative attributes of program quality and indirectly

through objective indicator rankings.14

A student quality-and-effort-view, for those

advancing a student quality-and-effort view, suggests that well-qualified, involved, and

motivated students are the centerpiece of high quality programs. In terms of the

curriculum requirements view, Haworth and Conrad (1997) state that those advancing

this view tend to emphasize three quality-related attributes: core and specialized course

work; residency requirements that encourage on-campus study; and a culmination

13

Haworth and Conrad (1997: 4).

14


19

19

experience—such as a thesis, research project, or comprehensive examination. Finally,

the multidimensional/multilevel view encompasses each one of the above views of

program quality.

The Engagement Theory of High-Quality Programs: Conceptual Framework

My dissertation has been informed by Haworth and Conrad‘s (1997) ―Engagement

Theory of Quality Programs.‖ Haworth and Conrad‘s theory is organized around the

central idea of diverse stakeholders‘ engagement in high-quality programs.

Stakeholders embrace student, faculty, alumni, employers, community, and

administrative engagement in teaching and learning. Based upon interviews with 781

participants involved in diverse higher education institutions, the authors define ―high

quality programs as those which contribute to the learning experiences for students that

have positive effects on their growth and development‖ (pp xii).

Haworth and Conrad (1997: 27) define high-quality programs as follows:

High-quality programs are those in which students, faculty, and

administrators engage in mutually supportive teaching and learning:

students invest in teaching as well learning, and faculty and

administrators invest in learning as well as teaching. Moreover, faculty

and administrators invite alumni and employers of graduates to

participate in their programs. In short, the theory accentuates the dual

roles that invested participants play in constructing and sustaining

programs of high quality.

The theory maintains that in high-quality programs, stakeholders – academics, students,

and administrators – invest in five separate clusters of program attributes (see Table 1).

Each attribute contributes to enriching the learning experiences for students that

positively affect their growth and development. The five clusters of program attributes

are: diverse and engaged participants, participatory cultures, interactive teaching and

learning, connected program requirements, and adequate resources. Haworth and

Conrad (1997: 28) state that the most important of these clusters is diverse and engaged

participants because ―faculty and administrators continually seek to attract and support

20

20

faculty and students who infuse diverse perspective into—and who are engaged in—

their own and others‘ teaching and learning.‖ The authors also emphasize that

stakeholders15

in high-quality programs invest heavily in ―participatory cultures‖ that

emphasize a shared program direction, a community of learners, and a risk-taking

environment.

These five clusters of the engagement theory encompass seventeen attributes. They are

listed in Table 1.

Table 1:

Five Clusters and Seventeen Attributes of High-Quality Program

Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3 Cluster 4 Cluster 5

Diverse and

Engaged

Participants

Participatory

Cultures

Interactive

Teaching and

learning

Connected

Program

Requirements

Adequate

Resources

- Diverse and

engaged faculty

- Diverse and

engaged

students

- Engaged leaders

- Shared program

direction

- Community

of learners

- Risk-taking

environments

- Critical

dialogue

- Integrative

Learning

- Mentoring

- Cooperative

Peer learning

- Out-of-class

activities

- Planned

Breadth and

Depth of

Coursework

- Professional

Residency

- Tangible

Products

- Support for

Students

- Support for

Faculty

- Support for

Basic

Infrastructure

―Interactive teaching and learning‖ is the third cluster of attributes of high-quality

programs. Haworth and Conrad (1997) state that stakeholders actively participate in and

contribute to one another‘s learning by means of critical dialogues about knowledge and

professional practice, faculty-student mentoring, cooperative peer learning projects, out-

of-class activities and integrative and hands-on learning activities.

15

Stakeholders include: program administrators, faculty, and students, as well as institutional

administrators, alumni, and employers. (Haworth and Conrad, 1997: 24).

21

21

The fourth cluster of attributes of high-quality program is ―connected program

requirements.‖ This cluster depends upon faculty and program administrators designing

program requirements that challenge students to develop a more mature and unified

understanding of their profession and its practice as they engage in breadth and depth

course work, apply and test their course-related knowledge and skills in a professional

residency, and complete a tangible product, such as a thesis, project report, or

performance.

The fifth cluster, ―adequate resources,‖ includes monetary as well as non-monetary

support for students, faculty, and basic infrastructure needs, in order to provide adequate

resources, faculty, and students to concentrate fully on teaching and learning.

Actions to Implement the Attributes of the Engagement Theory

According to Haworth and Conrad, for each of the seventeen attributes, stakeholders

take actions to implement the attribute, delineate the major consequences that these

actions have for enriching students‘ learning experiences, and specify the positive

effects that these learning experiences have on students‘ growth and development.

Below, I explain in a more detailed way each cluster of attributes.

Cluster One: Diverse and Engaged Participants

According to Haworth and Conrad (1997), diverse and engaged participants are the

people who take responsibility for teaching and learning. These participants play a

pivotal role in constructing and defining the quality of learning experiences that

students encounter in their programs. Faculty and administrators invest in two actions to

ensure that they have diverse and engaged faculty teaching in their programs. The first

is the development of hiring policies that value faculty members who have varied

theoretical and applied perspectives and a dedication to teaching. Second, a reward

structure that supports faculty for engaging in a broad range of scholarly activities

besides teaching is established. The main consequences of these actions are that they

consistently enrich the overall quality of students‘ learning experiences because faculty

infuse diverse perspectives into their classroom lectures, discussions, and out-of-class

interactions with students. In turn, the effects on students from their interactions with

22

22

diverse and engaged faculty are: first, students who graduate with a richer and more

creative understanding of knowledge and professional practice; second, students who

become more motivated professionals who commit themselves more entirely to their

own growth and development.16

The idea of diverse and engaged students is the second attribute of diverse and engaged

participants. Haworth and Conrad (1997: 48 – 54) emphasize that diverse and engaged

students are vital to high-quality programs. For that reason, faculty and program

administrators use a two-part recruitment strategy to attract diverse and engaged

students to their programs. First, they establish admission policies that place a high

value on students who would bring to their studies varied disciplinary and

experientially-based perspectives as well as a passion for learning. Second, they select

and admit only those students whose professional interests and goals interrelate well

with those of their program‘s curriculum and faculty. The positive outcomes of this

attribute are seen in their (students‘ or faculty‘s) understanding of theory and

professional practice. For example, Haworth and Conrad (1997) state that students who

are committed to their own and others‘ learning inspire one another to devote more fully

to their professions.

Engaged leaders, such as department and program chairs, faculty, and administrators, is

the third attribute of cluster one – ―diverse and engaged participants.‖ Repeatedly,

Haworth and Conrad (1997: 54 – 60) emphasize that the investments which engaged

department and program chairs create in their programs markedly enhance the quality of

students‘ learning. To that end, faculty and administrators use two strategies to attract

and retain engaged leaders. First, they recruit department or program chairs who invest

time and energy in championing their program. Second, they recruit institutional

administrators and faculty engaged in various activities that are aimed at supporting

leaders. These actions enhance students‘ learning in three ways: first, leaders

successfully support their programs to internal and external audiences and secure

resources to sustain them; second, leaders put significant effort into recruiting diverse

and engaged participants to their program; and third, leaders encourage faculty and

16

Haworth and Conrad (1997: 42 – 47).

23

23

students to assume informal leadership roles in their programs, thus enhancing their

ownership in them.

Cluster Two: Participatory Cultures

Haworth and Conrad (1997: 61 – 67) establish three attributes of quality within cluster

two. These attributes are: shared program direction, a community of learners, and a risk-

taking environment. The authors emphasize that stakeholders work together to build

shared understanding of and support for an overall program direction. Faculty,

administrators, and student leaders apply three strategies to develop and sustain a shared

direction in their programs. First, they invite program stakeholders to join them in

constructing a shared direction. Second, leaders encourage faculty, alumni, and

employers to participate in evaluation efforts in which they examine the fit between

their program‘s teaching and learning activities and its overall direction. And third,

leaders nurture and sustain understanding of their program‘s direction by frequently

communicating with internal and external audiences, both on and off campus. In

enhancing the quality of students‘ learning experiences, the positive effects on students

include: students develop distinct professional identities, and students who have

―connected‖ learning experiences become more keenly aware of where and how they

want to invest their energies after graduation.

The second attribute of participatory cultures is a ―community of learners.‖ Haworth

and Conrad (1997: 69 – 75), by working through nearly 800 interviews in their study,

found that an ethic of collegial teaching and learning imbued the culture of their

program such that faculty, students, and administrators interacted with one another more

or less as partners within a community of learners. The authors state: ―Membership in

such a community greatly enriched students‘ learning experiences and positively

affected their growth and development.‖ The main actions are: leaders who take

responsibility for helping to build a learning community; faculty who develop more

collegial and less hierarchical relations with students; and administrators, faculty, and

students who construct in- and out-of-class teaching and learning experiences to

facilitate and sustain co-learning among program participants. Thus, participants

encounter their programs as ―learning communities‖ in which faculty and students teach

and learn from one another as colleagues. Camaraderie permeates participants‘

24

24

interactions, and it advances and complements the sense of community. Participating in

a community of learners enriches students‘ growth and development in two major ways,

according to Haworth and Conrad. First, the collegial interaction that students have

with one another and with faculty strengthens their communication and teamwork skills.

In addition, by owing a large part to the contributions that others make to their learning

within these ―communities,‖ students develop a greater appreciation of and respect for

the value of collaborative approaches to inquiry, problem solving, and leadership.

A risk-taking environment is another important attribute of high-quality programs. A

supportive and challenging environment permits students to feel ―safe‖ to take risks in

their learning. By promoting risk-taking environments, students find a safe environment

where they feel encouraged to explore new ideas and test developing skills; faculty and

administrators also take risks by encouraging students to follow their lead and to

challenge themselves to stretch and grow in new ways. These actions result in

enhancing the quality of students‘ learning experiences because students are much more

likely to question orthodoxies, advance alternative perspectives, and engage in learning

activities that press the boundaries of their potential.17

In turn, students who take risks

within a supportive learning environment enhance their growth and development in two

important ways. First, they graduate as more competent and self-assured professionals.

Second, students develop into more imaginative and resourceful professionals when

they are educated in risk-taking learning environments.

Cluster Three: Interactive Teaching and Learning

Interactive teaching and learning is advanced through five actions. Critical dialogue is

the first. Haworth and Conrad state that when faculty and students question extant

knowledge, challenge core assumptions in their fields, and generate critical

understanding of knowledge and professional practice, students achieve richer learning

experiences that enhance their growth and development.18

Amacher and Meiners (2004:

51) highlight the importance of faculty engaged in teaching and learning activities. As

they put it: ―From the perspective of trustees and administrators, who want productive

17


18


25

25

faculty, the problem is to get faculty interested in teaching better and politicking

less….‖

Integrative learning is the second action. Haworth and Conrad (1997) state that students

have far richer learning experiences when they are challenged to link what they are

learning to tangible situations and issues in the outside world and when they link their

theory with practice, self with subject, and learning with living. In order to achieve

integrative learning, Haworth and Conrad found that faculty and administrators should

invest in teaching and learning activities that invite connections between theory and

practice by working with students in classes, on stage, in laboratories, or in the field.

Students who connect theoretical and applied knowledge to complex problems, issues,

and situations in the real world challenge themselves to interlace the principles and

practices of their disciplines into their own lives. Integrative learning positively affects

students‘ growth and development by approaching ―problems and issues in their fields

from a more holistic standpoint.‖19

In addition, students become more skilled at

communicating complex theoretical and technical knowledge to others in their work

settings.

Mentoring is the third action. Through this action faculty and administrators provide

instruction and direct feedback to students in order to strengthen their professional skills

and advance their understanding of knowledge and practice. Faculty and administrators

engage in three activities designed to promote mentoring in their programs: faculty and

administrators take an interest in students‘ career goals; faculty instruct students on a

one-on-one basis in order to sharpen their understanding of knowledge and professional

practice; and faculty provide students with regular feedback on the development of their

professional skills. The consequences and effects resulting from these actions are that

students have more meaningful learning experiences when faculty and administrators

invest in the mentoring process. Mentoring has two positive effects on students‘ growth

and development. First, the individualized feedback that students receive from their

mentors strengthens students‘ professional competence and confidence. Second,

19


26

26

mentoring helps students to advance their careers in the university and later in the

workplace.20

Cooperative peer learning is the fourth action. In this action students actively contribute

to and support one another‘s learning through various in- and out-of-class group

activities. Faculty and administrators use in- and out-of-class group activities to

promote cooperative learning among students. In addition, faculty members engage in

collaborative research and team-teaching activities. Students have opportunities to

participate in group activities in which they are able to contribute to and support one

another‘s learning toward their professional practice. These cooperative learning

experiences improve students‘ interpersonal and teamwork skills and improve students‘

confidence in their professional abilities.21

The notion of out-of-class activities is the fifth action. Through this action faculty,

administrators, and students develop sponsored formal and informal out-of-class

activities. Out-of-class activities could be ―involvement in a weekly journal club,

students‘ collaboration in writing activities, school-sponsored theater productions….‖22

These activities constitute an integral part of high-quality academic programs. Out-of-

class activities significantly enhance the quality of students‘ learning by helping

students to stay in touch with current developments in their fields. The favorable effects

on students‘ growth and development include enhanced oral communication and

interpersonal skills, as well as an appreciation of collaborative approaches to inquiry,

problem-solving, and leadership in their fields.

Cluster Four: Connected Program Requirements

Connected program requirements means the opportunity provided to students by faculty

and administrators to bridge the worlds of theory and practice—the classroom and the

workplace—through three sequential learning experiences. Through these requirements,

students develop a solid grasp of fundamental theories, practices, and skills. Faculty

20

Haworth and Conrad (1997: 99 - 104).

21


22


27

27

challenge students to apply and assess their course-related understanding in a

professional residency; and faculty require students to complete a tangible project—a

thesis, project report, or creative performance—in which they are expected to prove to

themselves and to others their abilities to make significant contributions to their

professions. Connected program requirements include planned breadth and depth course

work meaning students need to complete a blend of core and specialized course work.

The positive effects on students include professional competency and the development

of holistic perspectives within their fields. Professional residency, such as university

research and teaching assistantships for students pursuing academic careers or

internships in government agencies, businesses, and human service organizations, is

another component of connected program requirements. Faculty and administrators

develop and implement professional residency requirements in three ways: professional

residency related to students‘ career interests; cooperative agreements with employers,

alumni, and community members; and regular guidance and feedback. Completing a

professional residency contributes to students‘ growth and envelopment in three ways:

students mature into more confident and competent professionals; residency experiences

further clarify and strengthen students‘ professional identities; and, through the

confidence, knowledge, and professional networks that students develop in their

professional residencies, their job prospects are enhanced upon graduation.23

Creation of a tangible product is another attribute of high-quality programs within the

fourth cluster. Usually a thesis, project report, or creative performances are considered

acceptable tangible products. Faculty and administrators develop and implement

tangible product requirements in two ways: requirements are designed in light of each

program‘s direction and goals, and students receive guidance and feedback from faculty

and administrators for the culmination of those requirements. The consequences of

tangible product requirements can be seen upon the integration of principles, practices,

and skills students apply in their final products. Through tangible product requirements,

students improve their analytical and written communication skills, become more

mature, confident and independent professionals due to their major responsibility for

their projects from start to finish, and develop a ―big picture‖ perspective of their

profession.

23

Haworth and Conrad (1997: 119 – 142)

28

28

Cluster Five: Adequate Resources

Support for students is an important attribute of high-quality programs. ―Financial aid,

nontraditional course delivery formats, and career planning and placement assistance

consistently elevate the quality of students‘ learning experiences and favorably affected

their personal and professional development.‖24

Monetary and non-monetary supports for students often have positive effects on

their growth and development. Students who utilize career planning and placement

services are more likely to secure employment in their respective fields upon

graduation. Financial aid and nontraditional course delivery formats provide students

with the necessary support to concentrate more fully on their learning. Resources such

as these indirectly assist students in developing into more committed, lifelong learners

(Haworth and Conrad 1997).

The fifth cluster, adequate resources, encompasses support for students. Examples of

such support include financial aid, nontraditional course delivery formats, and career

planning and placement assistance, support for faculty including adequate monetary

resources and supportive reward structures, and support for basic infrastructure such as

laboratories, theaters, computers, library resources, and essential field-related equipment

and supplies.

Support for faculty includes adequate monetary resources and supportive reward

structures. Campus and departmental administrators support faculty through two major

actions. First, they allocate monetary resources for faculty salaries, sabbaticals, and

travel to professional conferences. Second, campus and departmental administrators

establish tenure and merit review policies that reward faculty for their involvement in

teaching and learning. Therefore, administrative efforts to support faculty almost always

help enhance students‘ learning. To illustrate, Haworth and Conrad (1997: 151) state

that when faculty are supported—monetarily as well as non-monetarily—for engaging

in teaching and learning, they invest considerable time and effort into teaching and

mentoring students.

24


29

29

The positive effect on students due to monetary and non-monetary support for faculty is

that students who study with faculty who are invested in their growth and development

are more self-confident, self-assured professionals.

Support for basic infrastructure (laboratories, theaters, computers, library resources, and

essential field-related equipment and supplies), the last attribute of high-quality

programs in the Engagement Theory, complements and enriches students‘ efforts to

learn advanced knowledge and techniques in their fields. In order to provide support for

basic infrastructure, campus and departmental administrators, as well as faculty,

monetary resources are needed to purchase requisite equipment and supplies to ensure

suitable laboratory, performance, and classroom facilities and to support institutional

library and computer needs.25

When resource needs are met, students have the ―tools‖ they need to learn advanced

knowledge and techniques in their fields. Support for basic infrastructure contributes to

students‘ growth and development in two ways: students develop into more

technically-competent professionals; and, as Haworth and Conrad state: ―This kind of

support indirectly complemented student investments further intensified many of the

effects that these attributes have on students.‖ state

A Framework for Developing and Sustaining High-Quality Programs

Haworth and Conrad (1997) propose a framework that is intended to help faculty,

administrators, and others learn about, assess, and improve the quality of undergraduate

and graduate programs. Anchored in their engagement theory of quality programs, the

framework reflects insights from the total quality management, organizational learning,

and higher education assessment literatures. Their framework for assessing and

improving the quality of academic programs places continuous learning among program

participants directly at the center of the program improvement effort and underscores

the integral roles that planning and evaluation play in this process. It encourages faculty,

administrators, and other program participants to make their ―working space a learning

25

(Haworth and Conrad (1997: 156).

30

30

space‖26

through an ongoing and dynamic process of study, feedback, modification, and

improvement.

Haworth and Conrad‘s (1997) framework is comprised of a set of guiding principles,

questions to inform assessment and improvement, and quality assessment criteria and

indicators. The guiding principles comprise a statement of ―best practices‖ for

evaluating and improving the quality of academic programs. Haworth and Conrad

developed these principles on the basis of what they learned from the nearly 800

interviews in their study, as well as from a critical reading of the total quality

management, organizational learning, and higher education assessment literatures. The

four principles are:

1. The Linking Pin: A Constant Commitment to Student Learning

2. People Make Quality Happen: Inclusivity and Engagement

3. Learning Never Ends: Continuous Program Improvement

4. Thinking Multidimensionally: Multiple Methods of Assessment

A constant commitment to student learning ―is not an easy task: it challenges faculty

and administrators to examine their beliefs about what their assumptions are, whom

they should serve, and what they hope to accomplish in their programs.‖27

This

directing principle makes students and their learning the central purpose of program

evaluation and improvement efforts. The second guiding principle is ―people make

quality happen: inclusivity and engagement.‖ This tenet considers establishing

participatory governance structures such as alumni councils, employer advisory boards,

and open forums with students.

The third principle for developing and sustaining high-quality programs considers the

idea that ―learning never ends: continuous program improvement.‖ Haworth and Conrad

(1997: 170) believe that meaningful quality assessment requires faculty and

administrators to make their ―working space a learning space‖ in which they constantly

examine and seek to learn about the inner workings of their own programs.

26

Senge et al. (1994: 35).

27


31

31

The final but not least important principle for assessing high-quality programs is

―thinking multi-dimensionally: multiple methods of assessment.‖ Haworth and Conrad

provide two justifications for this principle. ―To begin with, when a combination of

methods is used, faculty and administrators are far more likely to develop a more

holistic understanding of the quality of their programs…. Multiple methods have

another advantage as well. Since they build on the strengths of different approaches,

they help to cancel out the weaknesses embedded in a solitary approach to assessment.‖

The major benefits of this framework are: (1) it has a clear and consistent focus on

student learning and development; (2) this framework proposes a number of principles,

guiding questions, criteria, and assessment methods that place continuous quality

improvement squarely at the center of the quality assessment process; (3) the framework

has the potential to provide faculty, administrators, and others with useful data upon

which to base program planning and improvement decisions. All in all, ―This

framework offers those who have program planning and evaluation responsibilities with

a template for collecting relevant and trustworthy evidence that can better inform

decisions related to ongoing program improvement.‖28

In summary, the engagement theory advances a new perspective on high-quality

programs which emphasizes students‘ learning experiences and learning outcomes as

the primary purpose of academic programs, highlights the essential role that

stakeholders – primarily the academics, administrators, and students – occupy, and

provides a template for assessing quality.

Curricula Planning and Assessment Matter in High-Quality Programs

In broad strokes, the literature on program quality suggests that curricula planning and

assessment are crucial in developing high-quality programs because both promote

program continuous improvement. Curricula planning and assessment lead to

continuous program design, recruitment of outstanding faculty according to each

academic program‘s mission and vision, selection of students based on quality

28


32

32

standards, and provisions of the resources and services needed for promoting more

active learning.

Assessing Quality Programs

Rooted in a long-standing tradition of institutional attention to quality programs and

shaped on the anvil of a period of retrenchment and accountability, assessing the quality

of academic program has emerged as a central area of concern in higher education.

Conrad and Wilson (1985: 31) advanced the following criteria for evaluation in

academic program review (see Table 2).

Table 2:

Criteria for Evaluating Academic Programs

Quality

Need

Demand

Cost

- Quality of faculty

- Quality of students

- Quality of curriculum

- Quality of support services (library,

laboratories and equipment, physical

plant, computer facilities)

- Financial resources

- Quality of program administrators

- Centrality to

mission and other

campus programs

- Value to society

- Present and

projected

student

demand

- Demand for

graduate

- Cost

effectiveness

- Non-pecuniary

costs and benefits

Review of the Literature on Quality Programs in Developing Countries

Quality Education for All

Recent literature suggests that Latin American countries need to re-think quality

education for all, including diversity as an important attribute of high-quality programs.

For example, in its proposal, ―Education for All in the Americas: Regional Framework

of Action,‖ UNESCO (2000) recommends advancing quality education for all into a

33

33

national goal anchored in these common denominators: equity and equality of

opportunity.

UNESCO advanced the following recommendations to Latin American countries that

can help quality improvements: 1) create necessary frameworks so that education

becomes a task for all and that guarantee popular participation in the formulation of

state policies and transparency in policy administration; 2) increase social investment in

the entire educational system; 3) guarantee access and retention of all to the educational

system; 4) assure access to quality education to vulnerable social groups;29

5) give

greater priority to literacy training and education of young people and adults as part of

national education systems to improve existing programs and to create alternatives for

all young people and adults, especially those at risk; 6) continue to improve the quality

of education, by looking at education institutions as learning environments and

recognizing the social value of faculty and improving assessment systems; 7) formulate

inclusive education policies and design diversified curricula and education delivery

systems in order to serve the population that has been traditionally excluded for reasons

of gender, language, culture, or individual differences; 8) increase and reallocate

resources using criteria of equity and efficiency, as well as to mobilize other resources

with alternative delivery systems; 9) offer high levels of professional enhancement to

teachers/faculty and career development policies that improve the quality of their lives

and the conditions of their work; 10) coordinate education policies that encourage

multi-sector actions aimed at overcoming poverty and directed to populations at risk;

11) adopt and strengthen the use of information and communication technologies in the

management of education systems and in teaching and learning processes; 12) promote

educational leadership by granting individual institution autonomy with broad citizen

participation; 13) organize universities as a system rather than as an entity located in

one specific place or city;30

14) define administrative structures that take the university

as the basic unit, with autonomy, with citizen participation and establishing levels of

responsibility for each actor in the leadership process, in the control of results, and in

29

Latin America has opened university systems such as: Universidad Nacional Abierta (UNA) in

Venezuela, Universidad Particular Técnica de Loja in Ecuador, Universidad Nacional de Educación a

Distancia (UNED) in Costa Rica, Unidad Universitaria del Sur in Colombia, and distance education

system of the Universities of Brasilia, UNAM of Mexico 30

The Andrés Bello Agreement is a good example of such a system. It develops a regional analysis of the

future of the Latin American countries in order to promote cooperative agreements among countries.

These agreements focus on innovations and advances of science and technology and how those

innovations and advance can contribute for the development of each country.

34

34

accountability; 15) provide general education and liberal arts education to satisfy

learning-for-life needs; 16) engage faculty, students, administrators, and leaders of the

community by investing in shared program direction and active teaching and learning

and cooperative peer learning; 17) provide books and other didactic and technological

resources in order to improve student learning; 18) introduce community service, social

work, and university extension in all academic programs; 19) train faculty,

administrators, and students so that they may promote and support learning in everyday

life experiences; 20) reallocate resources by using a criteria of equity and efficiency

with mechanisms for establishing budgets and allocating resources that include broad

social participation that lend transparency and credibility to the management of

resources and guarantee accountability; 21) develop university planning for the whole

institution.

Quality Programs in Ecuador

The following are some of the challenges and the recommendations given by Jameson

(1997), Twombly (1997, 2002), Kells, (1998), Conrad (2003), among others who have

visited and analyzed the Ecuadorian Higher Education System.

Kenneth P. Jameson, a visiting Advisor to Ecuador from the Economics Department at

the University of Utah in Salt Lake City, presented a paper titled ―Social vs. Economic

Reform: Higher Education in Ecuador‖ at the Latin American Studies Association

Meeting which took place in Guadalajara, Mexico on April 18, 1997. Dr. Jameson

wrote: ―I will examine recent efforts to reform the higher education system in Ecuador.

My underlying concern is why fundamental reform of the social sectors is proving to be

so much more difficult and whether there are strategies that might accelerate the

process. Let me first situate Ecuadorian higher education. With 208,000 students it fits

into Orozco‘s (1996) ‗mid-and large-sized moderately massive national systems,‘ along

with Chile and Cuba. Ecuador has moved more slowly than many countries in

reforming the ‗culture‘ of its universities.‖ Jameson (1997) noted significant reforms in

individual higher education institutions whose long-run effects will be quite significant.

At the same time, conscious and systemic reforms have been unsuccessful; this returns

us to the broader question of reform in Latin America. In Jameson words:

35

35

Had reform programs been stimulated by conviction that improvements

in the social sectors were central to solving the macroeconomic problems

of the country, or that the social sector activities were central to the well-

being of Ecuador, the actual reform efforts would have had a different

character. They would have proceeded more rapidly and would have

been more successful.

Universities are unquestionably influenced by the society of which they are a part.

―Universities can only be as flexible, responsive, progressive, enlightened, and as vital

as the broader political traditions their societies allow.‖31

It is within this context of

economic crisis and political ineffectiveness that a few university leaders are proposing

a system of evaluation as a means of bringing universities to achieve high-quality

programs. High-quality programs need to be ―in line with the needs of a post industrial,

global economy‖ suggests, Twombly (1999). Universities in Ecuador are caught in the

transition between the traditional Napoleonic university that historically trained elites

for primary professional positions (law, medicine, and theology), and the post-modern

university whose role in the new global economy is to contribute to the ‗performativity‘

of the economic system by training technologically skilled workers."32

To complicate

the transition, Ecuadorian public universities are still operating under a concept of

university-society relations and a definition of autonomy established in the Córdoba

Agreement of 1918.‖ Resulting from the misconceptions of university autonomy,

significant political influences have been affecting the Ecuadorian universities. In the

Ecuadorian Constitution, Article 28 specifies that the State ―recognizes and guarantees

the autonomy of universities and polytechnics and the inviolability of their territory,

giving them the rights of individuals‖ (in CONUEP 1994). Twombly emphasizes the

fact that, ―The Congress or government cannot do anything that affects in any way the

normal function of a university and especially anything that affects its liberty and

autonomy. This has resulted in a lack of overall coordination in the system‖ (Twombly,

1997).

Forces that Influence the Ecuadorian Higher Education System

31

Rothblatt (1995).

32

Lyotard in Bloland (1995).

36

36

During May, 2003, Clifton F. Conrad,33

Professor of Higher Education at the University

of Wisconsin-Madison, led a workshop in Quito, Ecuador. The topic was, ―Toward a

Template for Ensuring High-Quality 21st Century Ecuadorian Universities in Light of

Turbulent External and Internal Environments: Avoiding Pitfalls and Seizing

Opportunities in Light of Experiences of Universities in the United States.‖

Professor Conrad invited the audience to join him in discussing both the challenges and

opportunities Ecuadorian people are facing in their universities and, in turn, to suggest

specific courses of action for addressing both the challenges and opportunities they

identified. Among the audience of more than 100 individuals, were presidents of

Ecuadorian universities and senior higher education officials in Ecuador. I would like to

quote Professor Conrad‘s first message to the audience.

The purpose of my address is to invite everyone in the audience to

consider what you might do at your universities to ensure quality in the

light of our experiences and ongoing efforts in the United States to

maintain quality in the midst of significant external and internal

influences. To put it another way, my address will explore the major

forces influencing higher education in the United States and, in so doing,

invite educators in Ecuador to reflect on the major challenges and

opportunities in maintaining and enhancing quality in their universities in

the 21st century. My comments are divided into three major parts. First,

I begin by identifying and discussing the major external and internal

forces influencing higher education in the U.S. today and, I believe, to a

considerable extent in Ecuador as well. Second, I review and critique

four popular models that universities in the U.S. have variously adopted

to respond to these external and internal forces. In so doing, I explore

both the proclaimed benefits and potential pitfalls for each of these four

models. Third, I conclude by advancing a template for change and

innovation anchored in specific courses-of-action—from institution-wide

policies and practices to changes and innovations to enhance curriculum,

33

Professor Conrad‘s visit to Ecuador was sponsored by the Ecuadorian Higher Education Council

―CONESUP‖ [Consejo Nacional de Educación Superior] and Universidad Internacional del Ecuador.

37

37

teaching, and learning—aimed at maintaining and enhancing quality.

Following my address, I invite you all to join with me in discussing both

the challenges and opportunities you are facing in your universities and,

in turn, to suggest specific courses of action for addressing both the

challenges and opportunities you identify.

Conrad focused on the following external and internal forces influencing

universities.

a. External forces

Demographic shifts in student clientele: more diversity, changing lifestyles (faster-

paced, technology-linked), and changing student expectations; changing expectations of

employer/corporate culture: demand for technical skills and general education and

continuing professional education; globalization: economic interdependence and need

for diversity (people, experiences, and multiculturalism); technology: implications for

workplace preparation and teaching and learning in the university; changing patterns in

educational financing: public to private funding, which leads to increased emphasis on

research and entrepreneurial activities; and public pressure for universities to advance

private and public good.

b. Internal Forces

Some of the internal forces identified by Conrad include the changing nature of

knowledge production and dissemination; the rise of the entrepreneurial spirit; academic

culture and socialization of new faculty and students; ―rugged individualists;‖ the

shortage of qualified faculty in some fields; university-wide pressure to reorganize and

downsize in light of budget deficits.

In addition, Conrad presented four popular models of change and innovation:

a. Virtual Degree Institutions/Programs

b. Corporate Training Institutions/Programs

c. Entrepreneurial Institutions/Programs

d. Service Station Institutions/Programs

38

38

Drawing on his own research and the literature on program quality, Conrad presented a

template for ensuring quality: courses-of-action—from institution-wide polices and

practices to changes and innovations aimed at enhancing curriculum and teaching and

learning—for maintaining and enhancing quality.

Know thyself: ―forge stronger institutional and programmatic

identities.‖ This category encompasses having a mission anchored in

history/tradition/character and retaining focus on traditional purposes

(scholarship, research, service) while preparing graduates with knowledge,

skills, and attitudes.

Embrace changes and innovations in alignment with institutional

identity: being responsive to emerging pressures of the new century through

changes and innovations aligned with purposes of institution; encouraging

movement toward interdisciplinary initiatives and programs—including joint

positions—in programs and faculty hiring.

Reconceptualize high-quality programs and related practices: quality

programs traditionally are measured in outputs, but should be measured in terms

of meaningful learning experiences that positively affect students‘ growth and

development.

Incorporate assessment into program design. Document student learning

through: increasing demands to document value of college degrees and using

student assessment to enhance teaching; and adopting systematic approaches to

ongoing assessment with particular emphasis on student learning experiences

and outcomes, both to improve teaching and student outcomes (portfolios,

journals, observations, or involvement at third party levels such as through

employment experiences).

Ensure a community both fiercely intellectual and sacred: combating the

loss of community and protect institutional and programmatic identities; having

a space in which a community of truth is practiced; encouraging inter-

disciplinary and cross-disciplinary perspectives; and developing a dimensionless

intellectual community.

Rediscover and place more emphasis on the societal (non-pecuniary)

benefits of higher learning: placing increased emphasis on general and liberal

39

39

education; and incorporating innovations such as service-learning into the

curriculum; this may include social justice component.

Four discussion questions that guided the workshop were:

1. What are the two major external and two major internal influences in

Ecuadorian universities today?

2. What are the major threats to quality and opportunities to strengthen quality

associated with each of these influences?

3. In light of the above, what major leadership initiatives do you think that

administrators should be taking to enhance and maintain the quality of their

universities?

4. What innovative models and approaches are you using to strengthen quality

in your respective universities?

Participants were organized into groups according to their academic program

orientation: arts and humanities, new technologies, business administration, computer

science, and technical programs. Table 3 shows their responses.

Table 3:

Ecuadorian Universities in Light of Turbulent External and Internal Environments

1. Internal &

External

Influences

2. Major Threats 3. Major Leadership

Initiatives

4. Innovative Models to

Improve Quality

Faculty

- Quality of faculty

- Full-time faculty

- Faculty with

graduate degrees

- Faculty

engagement

- Faculty are not trained

to be professors

- Need more full-time

faculty; most of them

are ―taxi professors‖34

- Pedagogical formation of

teachers and professors

- More preparation of

faculty in the scientific and

technology fields

- Faculty evaluation

- Center for Teaching

Excellence

- Competence-based

programs

34

―Taxi professor‖ is a Latin American expression and a cultural one used to define those professors that

are not considered as full-time faculty because they have to work at multiple universities or institutions to

earn enough money to support their families. ―Taxi professors‖ only teach few hours and never have

office hours.

40

40

Students

-Under-prepared

students

- Many students are

working people that

study, rather than

studying students

-Under-prepared

freshmen

- More participative and

active learning

- Hands on learning

Academic

Programs

-New programs

don‘t answer the

society‘s needs

- Offering of programs

that are not up-to-date

- Quality of programs

- Clarification of

institutional mission

(universities offer same

programs as those

offered at technical

schools)

- Philosophical conception

of the human being: ―a

person that needs to be

educated in an integral

way, with ethics and

virtues‖

- Competence-based

programs according to the

market demands

- New models for the

teaching and learning

process

- Curricula innovation

- Program evaluation

- Competence-based

programs

- Credit and modular

systems

- Active learning

Financial resources

-Decrease on

motivation

-Decrease on

quality

- Bad salaries paid to

faculty

- Decrease of quality

- Self-funding projects

- Relationships with

productive sector

through university‘s

services

Strategic Plans

mission

differential:

university vs.

technical education

- Need for a national

development plan

provided by CONESUP

- Slow development of

the country

- National higher

education policies

- More leadership

- Team work with a shared

goal

-Quality of systems

- Strategic planning

- Evaluation processes

- ISSO

- More flexible and

horizontal structure and

administration

Campus facilities

and technology

- Some campuses lack

adequate physical and

technological resources

- Use of new technology

- More innovation

The use of new

technology to improve

quality

- Technology transfer

centers

41

41

- Academic services

with new technologies

Internal / External

Competitiveness

and

Globalization

- Competence

- Migration

- Change

resistance

- Development of

network connections

-Internationalization of the

education

- Interinstitutional

alliances & agreements

- Workshops with

current topics

- Exchange students

and faculty

At the end of the workshop, Professor Conrad (2003) made the following comments and

recommendations:

Link K-12 and higher.

Advance more collaboration among universities. ―Taxi professors‖ is not

collaboration. Working together and building bridges help in economic and

environmental contexts.

Offer liberal arts programs. There is a tendency to develop technical programs

and leave out the liberal arts and sciences.

Introduce courses on weekends. Courses that can be very effective for learning

especially for working adults. People are more engaged in intellectual vitality.

Attract and retain highly-qualified faculty devoted to teaching and learning. In

terms of teaching and learning, ask yourselves: Am I doing more than I should?

Am I engaging people? How can I make this a better world?

Conclusion

From the literature review, it is clear that very little has been studied regarding attributes

of high-quality programs in Latin American countries, particularly in Ecuador. Previous

studies about program quality have only been advanced by U.S. and European

42

42

universities. Those studies have helped inform my research, particularly the ―Theory of

Program Quality‖ posited by Haworth and Conrad (1997).

43

43

CHAPTER THREE

METHOD

This chapter describes the method I used for identifying attributes of program quality in

universities in developing countries with my main focus on Ecuador. Informed by

theory of program quality advanced by Haworth and Conrad (1997), the guiding

question in this study was: What program attributes contribute to enriching learning

experiences for students that positively affect their growth and development?

Purpose of the Study

I sought to develop a theory of attributes of program quality that contributed to

enriching learning experiences related to learning outcomes for students that positively

affect their growth and development. In doing so, my underlying aim from the outset

was that the findings gained from this study could help inform decision-making, enrich

teaching, and guide evaluation with new perspectives and approaches for continuous

quality improvement in Ecuador and other developing countries.

Method

In order to identify program attributes that influence students‘ learning outcomes, I used

grounded theory, an inductive approach that generated a theory based on data I collected

from 60 interviewees who participated in this study. Like Haworth and Conrad (1997), I

used a ―positioned subject‖ approach that grounded my research in the perspective of

diverse stakeholders (administrators, faculty, students, alumni, and employers).

Anchored in a ―positioned subject‖ approach, I designed my strategy for research and

analysis. I used a two-stage sample in order to focus on stakeholders‘ understanding of

quality of students‘ learning outcomes. In the first stage, during December 2001 and

January 2002, I interviewed 48 participants mainly from two Ecuadorian Universities:

Universidad San Francisco de Quito (USFQ) and Pontificia Universidad Católica del

Ecuador (PUCE). The first stage took place during December 2001 and January 2002.

In the second stage, I interviewed 11 participants from Latin America and one from the

United States. The second stage took place in Costa Rica, during June and July 2003.

44

44

Similar to Haworth and Conrad (1997), I focused throughout on how participants

described and made sense of their interpretations and understandings of what they

believe contribute to most to high-quality programs.

Grounded Theory

Conrad (1982) in states: ―Grounded theory may be defined as theory generated from

data systemically obtained through the constant comparative method.‖ According to

Strauss and Corbin (1997), ―grounded theory methodology and methods (procedures)

are now among the most influential and widely used modes of carrying out qualitative

research when generating theory is the researcher‘s principal aim.‖ These authors

emphasized that grounded theory has spread from its original use by sociologists to the

other social sciences and to practitioner fields, including accounting, business

management, education, nursing, public health, and social work.

Glaser and Strauss (1967) first advanced the use of grounded procedures and techniques

such as the constant comparative method, an inductive method of discovering theory,

Glaser (1978), Strauss (1987), Strauss and Corbin (1990), and Denzin (1994) also

advanced the use of this approach.

As a grounded theorist, my acknowledgment and consideration of my background and

life experiences allowed me to be ―theoretically sensitive‖ to the data I collected and

analyzed. In order to provide the reader with an indication of who I am, I offer the

following autobiography.

I was born in Quito, Ecuador. I earned a Bachelor‘s Degree in Human Resources

Management in 1992 at the Technological University of Ecuador and my Master‘s

Degree in Educational Science in 1997 at the University of Kansas-Lawrence. I

received a Fulbright – LASPAU (Academic and Professional Programs for the

Americas) Scholarship for my Master‘s Degree (1995 – 1997). Currently, I am

completing my Ph.D. in Educational Leadership and Policy Analysis with focus on

higher education administration at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. I received a

scholarship from the Organization of American States (O.A.S.) for my Ph.D (2000 –

2002). I have worked for approximately four years as director of institutional self-

45

45

evaluation within the Technological University of Ecuador and in the Pacific University

of Ecuador. For the latter, I served as Vice-Chancellor of the Graduate School. In

addition, I have worked as a professor of human resources management, leadership, and

administration at the Catholic University of Ecuador (Pontificia Universidad Católica

del Ecuador - PUCE) and at the Technological University of Ecuador (Universidad

Tecnológica Equinoccial). I have also taught first and second year Spanish at the

University of Wisconsin – Madison (2000 - 2002, and 2004). Since 2003, I have worked

as the strategic planning professor for the Master‘s Program in Business Administration

at the Instituto de Altos Estudios Nacionales of Ecuador. During the spring semester of

2004, I taught a graduate course about evaluation for the Master‘s Program of the

School of Education at PUCE. Since September 2002, I have served as an Academic

Executive Officer and Advisor for the Ecuadorian Council of Higher Education System

(CONESUP).

To generate a theory encompassing the attributes of program quality, I used the

―constant comparative method.‖ My research consisted of methodical data collection,

coding, and analysis aimed at developing a theory. As developed by Glaser and Strauss

(1967), the constant comparative method comprises: (1) comparing incidents applicable

to each category; (2) integrating categories and their properties; (3) delimiting the

theory; and (4) writing the theory. The first stage centers on data collection, clustering,

and coding the information resulting from interviews/transcripts into related categories.

To meet this end, I used a cross-program analysis or a program-by-program analysis.

The information has been organized according to the major attributes of program quality

identified by the participants, which Strauss and Corbin (1990) refer to as ―open-

coding.‖ This process is also known as ―theoretical abstractions or symbolic

representation‖ (Haworth and Conrad, 1997: 221) because data are divided analytically.

For this part of my study, I scrutinized transcripts and narratives by using the method of

data reduction, meaning that data were analyzed by commonalities and differences.

Data were coded and categorized by clusters, and various validity checks were

completed. These validity clusters include contextual validation using multiple raters

and member checks with focus groups. In the second stage, I used axial coding for

integrating, relating, and testing the relationships of categories and subcategories

against the data. I was looking at emerging themes and common patterns. I focused on

methodically organizing and testing the attributes identified in the first stage to further

46

46

refine a theory of program quality. Third, directed by the resulting code-list of the major

program attributes and using cross-program discrimination, I delimited the theory based

on ―theoretical saturation‖ (Haworth and Conrad, 1997: 23). In this stage, I used

selective coding (Strauss and Corbin, 1990) in order to unify the categories around a

core category. Coding at this stage is not very different from the axial coding.

According to Strauss and Corbin, selective coding is performed at a higher, more

abstract level of analysis. In their words, ―Selective coding is the integrative process of

selecting the core category, systematically relating to other categories, validating those

relationships, and filling in categories that need further refinement and development.‖35

Multi-case Study Design

Using the constant comparative method and with the intent of placing stakeholders´

perspectives as the focus of my research, I used an open, multi-case study design along

with the ―positioned subject‖ approach. For this multi-case study design, I organized my

research around a sampling strategy in the selected programs and interviewees within

each program that were representative of Ecuadorian public and private universities. I

selected three programs at two private universities located in Quito, Ecuador:

Universidad San Francisco de Quito (USFQ) and Pontificia Universidad Católica del

Ecuador (PUCE). For further testing and to continue the development of my theory, I

interviewed 11 Latin American participants and on United States participant.

To define the attributes of program quality and the variations in terms of field of study, I

chose three different fields within professions and sciences. From professional fields, I

investigated business administration and biotechnology; from the sciences, I

investigated biology. For the above, I investigated undergraduate level programs.

Within each of the selected programs, I interviewed institutional administrators,

program administrators, faculty, students, alumni, and employers. To triangulate the

findings, I interviewed people who differed in terms of level of responsibility and level

of interest.

35

Strauss and Corbin (1990).

47

47

Interview Process

Consonant with my positioned subject approach, I used focused interviews to obtain in-

depth information. To engage institutional administrators, program administrators, and

faculty in conversations, I provided them with the topic to be covered in advance.

Students were interviewed in focus groups. During the first-stage sample, only three of

interviewees were not available at the research site; these three interviewees (one

employer and two alumni) were contacted over the telephone. For the second-stage

sample, four of the interviewees completed their responses by electronic mail.

Involvement of participants was strictly voluntary.

The interview protocol consisted of a set of preplanned, open-ended questions. The

following questions guided my research: What program attributes in universities in

developing countries contribute to positive learning outcomes for students? I addressed

the following sub-questions for each attribute:

1. What actions do stakeholders engage in implementing the attribute?

2. What positive impact do these learning outcomes have on student growth

and development?

When interviewees needed prompting, I asked questions such as: What do you think are

the most important characteristics of the program? What have you and others learned?

What activities or events have been most instrumental in contributing to your learning

in your field? Where does ―real learning‖ take place for students here? I also provided

information when the requested question was unclear to the participants. In order to

obtain in-depth information, I encouraged interviewees to establish the direction of the

dialogue. In general, interviews were conducted as conversations where participants felt

they were in a receptive environment in which they could share their thoughts and

experiences.

I transcribed the recorded interviews. I maintained both confidentiality and anonymity.

The names of the participants are not associated in any way with the research findings.

Only code numbers identify the findings.

48

48

Trustworthiness

Haworth and Conrad (1997) defined trustworthiness as those measures that they, as

qualitative researchers, took to safeguard the accuracy, consistency, and validity of their

research findings during the data collection process. They ensured trustworthiness

primarily through what researchers in the social sciences commonly refer to as

―triangulation,‖ namely collecting and analyzing data across multiple and different data

sources and using multiple methods of data collection. Haworth and Conrad (1997)

used three basic strategies to enhance trustworthiness. First, they built triangulation by

selecting stakeholder groups who were at different stages with respect to their master‘s

program. Second, just as triangulation was built into Haworth and Conrad design in the

way they selected interviewees, it was also built into the analysis process used in the

fieldwork, and they frequently exchanged notes and observations from their interviews.

They continued to triangulate and learn from each other‘s perspectives by critiquing one

another‘s summaries. Third, to ensure that all findings were based on the data and that

the inferences drawn from the data were supported, they performed extensive data

analysis. As they summarize: ―In each of the three stages of data analysis, we jointly

reexamined our inferences and the evidentiary basis for each and every finding by

continually asking one another questions about both the process and the product of the

study.‖36

Based on Haworth and Conrad‘s three basic strategies to enhance trustworthiness, I

built triangulation into the study. I used a cross-program analysis. In order to label

categories and subcategories, the information was coded according to the major

attributes of program quality that I identified in this study and that I present in Chapter

Four. When it was appropriate, I used multiple measures. Judd, Smith, and Kidder

(1991) suggest the use of multiple measures without violating any claim that one

operational definition is superior. In addition, reliability and discriminant validity37

will

36


37

Discriminant validity refers to all valid measures that show good convergence with other measures of

the same thing. It should also fail to correlate with measures that are supposed to tap basically different

constructs (Judd, Smith, and Kidder, p. 51).

49

49

help avoid contamination from systematically varying constructs.38

Le Compte and

Goetz (1982) state: ―Reliability refers to the extent to which a study can be replicated or

reproduced.‖ Validity requires reliability as a prerequisite. This study considered

research validities such as construct validity which refers to constructs of theoretical

interest that can be successfully operationalized in the research; internal validity, when

conclusions can be drawn from the causal effect of one variable on another; and external

validity, when generalization of results of this research can be replicated in other

settings. As LeCompte and Goetz (1982) describe: ―Establishing validity requires

determining the extent to which conclusions effectively represent empirical reality and

assessing whether constructs devised by researchers represent or measure the categories

of human experiences that occur.‖

Further Testing of the Attributes of High-Quality Programs

As indicated earlier, my research had two stages. During the first stage I identified the

attributes of high-quality programs that are presented in Chapter Four (five clusters and

thirteen attributes). Because this study was limited to two private universities in

Ecuador, I wanted more evidence to confirm, test, and triangulate the attributes of

quality programs that I identified in Ecuador. To this end, I extended my research.

After two years completing the first stage of my research process, I had the opportunity

to attend a graduate class in Costa Rica, where I met several international business

professionals from different Latin American universities. On the grounds that this was a

splendid opportunity to further test the findings—attributes—resulting from the first

stage, I decided to extend my research to a second stage. In this second stage, I

interviewed twelve more participants. Haworth and Conrad‘s ―Engagement Theory,‖ in

concert with my building on and extending their theory, found strong support regardless

the countries types of universities represented in the sample. In summary, in the course

of two stages I was able to support with further evidence the attributes of high-quality

that I identified during the first stage.

38

Constructs refer to phenomena, both subject and object. Naïve hypotheses argue that one phenomenon

or behavior—the subject in the hypotheses—causes or is associated with another phenomenon or

behavior—the object (Judd, Smith, and Kidder, p. 10).

50

50

Sampling Strategy and Procedures

Strauss (1987) defines theoretical sampling as a means where the researcher decides on

an analytical basis which data to collect and where to find them. He provides a basic

question in theoretical sampling: To which groups or subgroup of population, events,

and activities (to find varying dimensions, strategies, etc.) does one turn next in data

collection? What is the theoretical purpose? Conrad (1982) defines theoretical sampling

as the process by which ―the universe of data to be collected is delimited through the

use of theoretical criteria. The search for data relevant to the generation and verification

of the theory continues until all of the major concepts and their interrelationships have

been theoretically saturated.‖ According to Strauss and Corbin (1990: 242), theoretical

saturation is reached when no new or relevant data seem to emerge regarding a

category. Such category development is dense, to the extent that all the paradigm

elements are explained along with variation and process, and the relationships between

variables are well established and validated. Cresswell (1998) states, ―A grounded

theorist is typically able to saturate all study categories after conducting 20 to 30

interviews in the field.‖

Haworth and Conrad (1997) suggest using a multi-case study design anchored in a

substantively representative sample. The sampling strategy includes the selections of

programs as well as interviewees within programs. The participants need to be

theoretically relevant. Thus, within each program, I selected individuals representing the

different stakeholder categories: institutional administrators, program administrators,

faculty, students, alumni, employers, and business leaders from six Latin America‘s

developing countries and one United States citizen.

For sampling strategy, Straus and Corbin (1990) suggest a three-step process. The first

step is ―open sampling‖ to guide the initial data selection. Researchers have to choose

and select the data that they believe are theoretically relevant to the inquiry of the study.

The second step is ―maximizing opportunities to explore developing concepts under

different conditions.‖ Once again, the researcher samples on the basis of theoretical

relevance by using rational and variational sampling techniques and focuses on both

connecting and discriminating the dimensions identified in the preceding stage. In the

51

51

third step, the researcher uses ―discriminate sampling‖ to test further previously

developed dimensions, categories, and relationships across categories. At this stage,

Strauss and Corbin state that the sampling process becomes directed and deliberated

because the researcher can make choices about whom and what to sample to obtain the

required information.39

My sample at the two Ecuadorian universities and with the diverse Latin American

leaders in the business field was selected by using the ―positioned subject approach‖

(Haworth and Conrad, 1997: 16). According to the authors, this approach grounds the

research in the perspective of diverse stakeholders, provides a strategy for research and

analysis, and focuses on stakeholders‘ interpretations of the quality of students‘ learning

outcomes within individual programs—including how people describe and make sense

of the programs and what they believe contribute most to enriching their quality—

always from their standpoint or perspectives. Haworth and Conrad‘s approach can also

be combined with the ―purposive sampling method‖ (Judd, Smith, and Kidder, 1991).

The reason ―behind purposive sampling is that with good judgment and an appropriate

strategy, we can handpick the cases to be included and thus develop samples that are

satisfactory in relation to our needs.‖40

Diverse participants (the stakeholders) for this

study were selected for their academic knowledge and experience. Participants‘

willingness to share their experiences, interpretations, expectations, and knowledge of

the quality of students learning outcomes in individual programs were relevant factors

for the success of my research.

Theoretical Sensitivity

Theoretical sensitivity is the ability to give sense to data. Strauss and Corbin (1990)

state that theoretical sensitivity is ―the capability to separate the pertinent from that

which isn‘t.‖ While theoretical sensibility can influence the data collection and data

analysis process, I trusted that my professional experience enabled me to ―separate the

39

Straus and Corbin (1990).

40

Judd, Smith, & Kidder (1991: 136).

52

52

pertinent from that which it isn‘t.‖ I understood that there were challenges related to

theoretical sensibility because this study is qualitative and it, by definition, contains

subjective interpretations of data.

Ethics

According to Kidder and Judd (1986), maintaining confidentiality is a key element in

social research. One of the solutions is to have interviewees sign a consent form that

informs the interviewees that their names will not be associated with the research

findings. Since I had already known some of the institutional administrators, program

administrators, faculty, and students at the two universities where I conducted my

research, I followed the advice given by de Laine (2000: 134): ―Appropriate boundaries

between the researcher and subject may need to be maintained when in the professional

role, to avoid ethical problems arising from different loyalties and expectations that

have to do with the management of anonymity and confidentiality.‖ I have ensured

privacy and confidentiality by referring to participants and information through codes.

Selection of Programs

To provide essential samples for defining attributes of program quality, I selected three

programs in professions and sciences: two business administration and biotechnology

programs in the professions and biology in the sciences. I chose business administration

programs because the largest percentage of each student body is enrolled in this field at

the two universities (USFQ and PUCE). The two universities represented in the sample

included one traditional university and one new university patterned after the United

States liberal arts models. The student body at one of the institutions generally belonged

to middle and lower classes while the student body at the other university was mostly

comprised of upper class students. The three programs at both universities are

prestigious on an Ecuadorian scale.

Selection of Interviewees within Programs

I selected the interviewees within programs by using the selective sampling method

(Schatzman and Strauss, 1973). The idea for selective sampling was used because I was

53

53

able to locate interviewees according to a preconceived but logical initial set of

dimensions such as time or identity. I decided to focus this research on the two chosen

Ecuadorian universities during a first pre-stage process in 1995. I conducted research at

those universities with the aim of exploring the perspectives of university authorities

regarding institutional self-evaluation processes. For the current study, I learned more

about the attributes of program quality in both settings. Even though I knew people at

both settings, I am confident that they did not have preconceived notions due to my

participation as a researcher. By demonstrating respect and confidentiality to the

interviewees‘ ideas and ideals, I was able to guarantee the credibility of the findings. De

Laine (2000: 122) states: ―Demonstrating loyalty and allegiance to workers‘ ideals and

ideas and engaging in informal practices approved by the group, but not necessarily by

upper management, could strengthen the trust between the researcher and subjects.‖

Participants

Participants included the Academic Affairs Director for the Ecuadorian Higher

Education Council, 12 university authorities such as chancellors, vice-chancellors,

academic directors, graduate school directors, and a director of student affairs, 12

professors, one administrator, 15 students, two employers, three alumni, and two

student leaders were representative of Ecuadorian public and private universities. For

further testing, I interviewed one participant from the United States living in Costa Rica

and 11 participants who were representative of Latin America. The Latin American

participants were from the following countries: one from Chile, two from Colombia,

one from Costa Rica, four from Ecuador, two from El Salvador, and one from Peru.

Table 4 summarizes information about interviewees who participated in this study.

Table 4:

Interviewees that Participated in this Study

Country Institution Interviewees Sub-

total

Total

Participants from Ecuadorian Universities

48

Ecuador CONESUP Academic Director 1 1

54

54

Ecuador USFQ Chancellor

Vice-Chancellor

Deans

Directors

Professors

Students

Alumnus

Employers

1

1

2

2

5

8

1

1

21

Ecuador PUCE Rector

Vice-Rector

Deans

Directors

Professors

Administrators

Students

Alumni

Employers

1

1

2

2

7

1

7

2

1

24

Ecuador FEPE41

FENAUPE42

College Student Association Leaders

1

1

2

Participants from the United States and various Latin American Countries

12

United States University of California – Santa Cruz 1 1

Chile Fundación de Educación 1 1

Colombia Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana

Universidad Nacional Facultad de Minas

1

1

2

Costa Rica Universidad Latina de Costa Rica 1 1

Ecuador

Ecuador

Ecuador

Universidad Católica de Guayaquil

Universidad Laica Vicente Rocafuerte

Universidad de Azuay

Universidad Estatal de Guayaquil

1

1

1

1

4

El Salvador

Universidad José Simeón Cañas

Universidad Politécnica

1

1

2

Perú Pontificia Universidad Católica de Perú 1 1

Total number of interviewees 60

41

FEPE: Ecuadorian Private Universities Federation.

42

FENAUPE: Ecuadorian Universities and Polytechnic Schools Federation.

55

55

Data Analysis

Consonant with grounded theory, the process of analyzing data was performed

immediately after I started collecting data. Data analysis for this study is organized

through the construction of a theory of attributes of quality programs. I used the

―constant comparative method‖ to analyze my data. Haworth and Conrad (1997) state

that on the basis of what they learned from interviews across the 47 Master‘s programs

in their sample, their data analysis was informed throughout their systematic endeavor

to identify and weave together attributes and clusters of attributes of high-quality

programs into an integrated theory. They used the constant comparative method to

analyze their interview material first within and then across the programs. Similar to

Haworth and Conrad (1997), I established the criterion that each attribute had to be

considered important by the stakeholders.

Consistent with the constant comparative method, I analyzed data following the four

stage process. During the first stage, I reviewed the transcripts. I used the guiding

question and the regulations to record in a codebook—on a program-by-program

basis—attributes that at least three stakeholders considered significant. To organize data

into categories, like Haworth and Conrad (1997), I coded data in clusters such as:

attributes; reasons why the attributes are considered important by stakeholders; actions

taken by stakeholders to establish the attribute; and consequences and effects of the

attributes on students‘ learning outcomes.

The second stage involves to systematically refining and testing attributes of program

quality to construct a theory of program quality. Thus, I used the list of program

attributes contained in the codebook that resulted from the first stage of this process. I

made constant comparisons of the data from the intervening programs in order to look

for evidence that sustains, disproves, or modifies the program attributes that were

identified through the process. By doing so, I was able to construct, step-by-step, a

preliminary theory of program quality.

In the third stage of data analysis, the guidelines for ―theoretical saturation‖ were met. I

delimited and tested the theory by discriminating among the inventory of program

attributes. Haworth and Conrad (1997) suggest systematically looking for negative

56

56

evidence to refute each of the attributes included in the emerging theory. I outlined a

theory that embraces the attributes that were clustered. Consistent with Haworth and

Conrad (1997), for each attribute the theory will include the actions taken by

stakeholders to enact the attribute and the effects that these learning outcomes had on

student development. To conclude, the fourth stage, the constant comparative method,

was writing a theory of program quality.

I built a conditional matrix in order to distinguish and link levels of conditions and

consequences related to the phenomenon under study. According to Strauss and Corbin

(1990), the conditional matrix enables the researcher to both distinguish and link levels

of conditions and consequences specified within the axial coding model. The researcher

may develop and visually portray a conditional matrix that elucidates the social,

historical, and economic conditions influencing the central phenomenon; however, he

says that this method is not frequently found in grounded theory studies.

In order to ensure that my findings accurately reflect reality, I introduced the ―member

check‖ technique (Glesne and Peshkin, 1992) to triangulate the understandings and

findings. In doing so, I shared my notes and findings with key interviewees in order to

obtain their comments based on the list of attributes of quality programs.

Interview Process and Protocols

To interview individual stakeholders at each university and to request their

participation, I provided each interviewee with a letter of presentation including the

following components: a brief introduction regarding my background; the intent of this

study; a request for their voluntary participation in my study; and an acknowledgement

of their right to privacy and a guarantee that their identity would remain confidential

and that participants would be referred to only by codes.

At the beginning of each interview, I took a moment to introduce myself. In these

introductions I reviewed my background and explained the purpose of my study. In

addition, I provided the interviewees with consent forms to sign if they were willing to

participate. When necessary, I addressed any concern from the interviewees.

57

57

During the interviewing process, if I would have been asked by the interviewees to

provide them with a copy of the saved material, I would have done so, but none of them

asked; however, some of the participants asked me for a copy of this dissertation. I

explained to the participants that I will give the university a summary of the research

findings and conclusions.

Interview Questions

The interview questions included but were not limited to the following:

1. What program attributes in universities in developing countries

contribute to enriching learning outcomes for students that positively

affect their growth and development?

2. What actions do stakeholders take to implement the attributes?

3. What consequences and positive effects do these actions have for

enhancing student learning outcomes?

Field Note-Taking

My field notes encompass the information that I typed and saved on my laptop

computer and group observations. My field note-taking started with a heading that

included the name of the interviewee, his or her title, university department, and time

and date of the interview. The information has been organized by columns in order to

make notations related to the interviewing moment. All of the information has been

saved. The largest central column, following Bogdan and Biklen‘s advice (1992),

served to make descriptive notations, recording ideas that flowed from what the

particular interviewee said and communicated during the interview. The purpose for

writing notations in an orderly way was to capture the key ideas.

It is important to estate that all interviews were conducted in Spanish and I translated

the information into English.

Limitations of This Study

58

58

First, most of the interviews were conducted only at two private Ecuadorian universities

that are among the most prestigious in the country out of the 66 private and public

universities approved by CONESUP (December 2004). Accordingly, the response to

my interviews would probably not be the same if I had interviewed people in public

universities. And second, I did not benefit from others‘ insight as I was the only

researcher conducting this study. Having another person commenting, analyzing, and

coding the information would have enhanced the process of presenting the attributes of

quality programs in universities in developing countries.

59

59

CHAPTER FOUR

FINDINGS

In keeping with Haworth and Conrad‘s (1997) definition of a high-quality program, the

question that guided my data analysis throughout was: What program attributes in

universities in developing countries contribute to learning experiences for students that

positively affect their growth and development? As I identified specific program

attributes, I concurrently addressed two sub-questions: first, what actions do

stakeholders engage in to implement the attribute?; and second, what positive affects do

these actions have on student growth and development?

On the basis of what I learned from the 60 interviews, my data analysis was informed

by a systematic endeavor to identify and weave together attributes of high-quality

programs. I used the constant comparative method to analyze my interview material

within and across the four selected programs at two private Ecuadorian universities and

at an international meeting in Costa Rica. While in Costa Rica, I had the opportunity to

interview 11 participants from different Latin American universities and one individual

from a United States university. Based on my interviews, I identified 13 attributes and

grouped them into five clusters: (1) highly qualified participants, (2) learning-centered

cultures, (3) interactive teaching and learning, (4) connected program requirements, and

(5) adequate resources.

Table 5 summarizes the five clusters and 13 attributes of high-quality programs. The

table also specifies the actions that stakeholders take to implement each attribute and

identifies the positive learning outcomes for students.

60

60

Table 5:

Attributes of High-Quality Programs

In Latin American and in Ecuadorian Universities

Cluster One

Highly Qualified Participants

Attributes Actions Positive Outcomes

Highly

Qualified Faculty

University authorities develop hiring

polices to attract professors with advanced

degrees (from first-rate universities).

University authorities develop a

reward structure that recognizes the

achievements of faculty.

Students become more creative, honest,

and confident professionals and leaders

because they learn from excellent

professors.

Students become more committed to

their professions as well as more inspired

and confident professionals because they

learn from highly qualified faculty.

Highly

Qualified Students

Faculty and administrators establish

admissions policies based on their

institutional mission and on pre-

established quality standards to attract full-

time students who will invest in their

learning.

University authorities through the

higher education system introduce a

national admission test to ensure high

admission standards.

Students learn how to motivate one

another to invest their best efforts to achieve

high-academic standards.

Students learn to encourage one another

to become more fully devoted to their

professions.

Cluster Two

Learning-Centered Cultures


Shared

Program Direction

Focused on

Learning

Faculty and administrative leaders

invite stakeholders to join them in

developing shared program direction.

Students develop more well-defined

professional identities

Shared program direction focused on

61

61

University authorities invite faculty,

students, alumni, and employers to

participate in assessment efforts in which

they study the fit between their program‘s

teaching and learning activities and its

overall direction.

learning helps students to develop a clearer

sense of professional direction and a better

consciousness of where and how they wish

to invest their professional energies upon

graduation.

Real-World

Learning

Experiences

Introduce more realistic curricular

design with focus on the development of

learning skills through case analysis to

enrich the learning process.

Provide experiential learning through

the development of real project for the

productive sector and industries.

Students acquire connected learning

experiences, as well as develop the

necessary skills to face real-world

challenging experiences

Reading-

Centered Culture

Administrators and faculty introduce

policies to promote a ―reading-centered

culture.‖

Students read more and develop more

creative thinking; in turn, they are better

able to contribute with new ideas grounded

in knowledge.

Supportive

and Risk-Taking

Environment

Faculty and administrators develop a

supportive learning environment in which

students feel confident to take risks by

questioning paradigms and confronting

knowledge.

Students who engage in risk-taking

activities develop their critical thinking

ability and learn to confront what is already

known with the unknown.

Students become more empowered

professionals.

Cluster Three

Interactive Teaching and Learning


Integrative

learning: Theory

with Practice, Self

with Subject

Faculty, administrators, and students

develop hands-on learning experiences

through team-work activities that connect

theory with practice.

Students who participate in integrative

learning activities develop an enhanced

practical and logical problem-solving

ability.

62

62

Students become more adept at

communicating theoretical and technical

knowledge to others, especially by

enhancing their interpersonal skills.

Exclusive

Tutoring and

Mentoring

Professors provide personalized

education within the context of an

interactive professor-students relationship.

Professors meet regularly with

students to provide feedback on their

professional and personal development.

Leader, administrators, and faculty

develop supportive environments for

tutoring and mentoring students.

Students gain self-confidence and self-

esteem.

Students become aware of their

weaknesses and engage in continuous self-

improvement.

Cluster Four

Connected Program Requirements


Planned

Breadth and

Depth Course

Work

Faculty and administrators develop core

and specialized course work requirements.

Students become deeper thinkers with

wider visions They develop a more holistic

understanding of knowledge and practice

that enhances their personal and

professional lives.

Tangible

Products

Faculty and administrators design

tangible products to complete their

programs.

Faculty and administrators support

students throughout this culmination

activity, providing guidance and feedback as

needed.

Students become confident and

independent professionals by assuming

major responsibility for their projects.

Students become more analytical

thinkers with wider perspective on their

professions.

63

63

Cluster Five

Adequate Resources


Support for

Students

Faculty and administrators support

students with funds for scholarships, grants,

loans, and funds for study-abroad, including

agreements with the private sector in order

to provide students with job openings and

internships opportunities.

Faculty, administrators and employers

develop agreements and alliance for student

internships and job opportunities after

graduation.

Since students do not have to worry

about economic resources, they invest their

energies in learning.

Since students have opportunities to

study abroad and to transfer their credits to

international universities, they become more

competitive and confident about their

competence.

Support for

Faculty

University authorities allocate monetary

resources for faculty remuneration and

reward structures based on faculty quality

and achievements.

University authorities support faculty

publications by allocating monetary

resources and sabbaticals.

When professors invest their time in

student teaching and learning, students feel

more satisfied with their educational

experiences and become better

professionals.

When students benefit from faculty‘s

quality preparation and publications, they

become more qualified professionals

Support for

Campus

Infrastructure

University authorities allocate monetary

resources to update laboratories, libraries

(virtual libraries), research stations,

computer labs, and necessary equipment and

supplies.

University authorities invest in campus

maintenance, innovation, and aesthetics.

Students become more technically

skilled to perform their jobs.

Students who study on campuses with

considerable resources develop a sense of

belonging with their universities.

64

64

Attributes of High-Quality Programs In Latin American and in Ecuadorian Universities

A description of each attribute of high-quality programs follows, including the actions

taken and their consequences on student development and growth.

Cluster One: Highly Qualified Participants

Based on evidence from the 60 interviewees, I identified ―highly qualified participants‖

as the first cluster of attributes of quality. Below, I discuss the actions that university

authorities, faculty, and administrators make to engage highly qualified faculty and

students as well as the positive outcomes on student growth and development.

1. Highly Qualified Faculty

One of the major attributes of high-quality programs is a highly qualified

faculty. All of my interviewees told me that highly qualified professors are people who

not only have first-rate educations but are deeply devoted to teaching and passionately

connected to their work

Actions

University authorities, faculty, and administrators used two strategies to attract high-

quality faculty. First, they defined hiring policies to attract and retain professors with

Ph.D. and master‘s degrees; second, they developed a reward structure that recognizes

faculty achievement.

To illustrate, at one of the universities in my sample (USFQ), university authorities,

administrators, and faculty invested time and effort to ensure that they engaged highly

qualified faculty by developing hiring policies that helped them secure faculty who

demonstrated high competence standards. For example, they looked for faculty

members with doctoral degrees, especially from the United States or Europe. A Dean at

Universidad San Francisco de Quito (USFQ), using himself as an example to illustrate

faculty committed to high-quality programs, explained how USFQ hired him because of

his education. He stated, ―I was hired as the Dean of Life Sciences and Biotechnology at

65

65

USFQ because I had the opportunity to attend a prestigious university in the United

States where I received my Ph.D. in Biology.‖

A university authority at USFQ emphasized, clearly, that faculty at his university were

hired because of their graduate degrees received from prestigious United States research

universities:

Almost 90 percent of our professors with graduate degrees hold Ph.D.‘s

and masters degrees from prestigious United States research universities.

This is not a traditional university; this is a university patterned after the

United States model, and a model based on liberal arts and general

education.

It is important to note that professors with doctoral degrees were highly valued at both

private universities and public universities in developing countries, particularly in

Ecuador. To illustrate, a business student at USFQ affirmed, ―I am attending this

university because I have always wanted to have good professors who inspire me to find

what I want to be and to love what I do.‖

In the same vein, one of the leaders of the National College Students Association

(FENAUPE) stated, ―We students and alumni care about quality faculty. We need more

professors with doctoral degrees because they can help us to improve our critical

thinking (and, in turn, our programs).‖

The second action to attract and retain highly qualified faculty was to develop a reward

structure that recognizes faculty achievements. A Dean at Pontificia Universidad

Católica del Ecuador (PUCE) stated:

Currently, we are meeting with international advisors—for example,

advisors from Colombian universities, faculty, and administrators—in

order to define a reward structure that defines strategies for recognizing

outstanding professors.

66

66

Again and again across institutions, individuals told me that universities in developing

countries need to develop reward structures that recognize faculty achievement because

it motivates faculty to devote their energy to the learning process. At the present time,

the majority of universities in developing countries, especially in Ecuador, lack any

kind of reward structure to recognize faculty achievements. For this reason, some highly

qualified faculty members resign from their teaching activities and go to places where

their quality is valued and rewarded. Professors clearly need to be recognized for their

quality. To illustrate, a business professor at PUCE who earned a graduate degree at a

prestigious U.S. university stated:

I have been teaching at this university for several years. I feel that my

level of motivation is decreasing in spite of my passion to teach and help

students become highly-qualified professionals. I have not received

special recognitions despite my academic and professional preparation or

for my quality of teaching. I do receive excellent evaluations every

semester, but I neither receive a good salary nor rewards for my good

teaching practice. The lack of a reward structure really discourages me to

the point that I would like to find a job in a university where university

leaders really care about the quality of professors by recognizing them

with monetary and non-monetary rewards.

To be sure, a university authority at PUCE stated that professors teach there for reasons

other than monetary rewards. Still, I found that all interviewees emphasized the

importance of developing a reward structure that recognizes not only good teaching

practices and publications but also externally-funded applied research projects, technical

reports and local consulting assignments that broaden and deepen their perspective on

professional knowledge and practice.

Positive Outcomes

Students were quick to attest that positive outcomes were associated with highly

qualified faculty. Students became more creative, honest, and encouraged professionals

and leaders because they learned from professors who devoted their time to teaching,

67

67

tutoring-mentoring, and preparing students in a holistic way. In terms of how much

effect highly qualified professors had on student development and growth, one alumnus

from the biology field at PUCE stated:

Since we had good professors, we now are able to be good professionals

in the biology field; we are more competitive, and it makes it easy to find

jobs and funds because we have the necessary skills to perform our

projects. Not only I have grown as a professional but also as a person.

My professors were generous and very open to teach me.

Students who learned from committed scholars became more committed to their

professions as well as more inspired and confident professionals. As a Latin American

participant from Universidad Latinoamericana de Costa Rica put it, ―Students who had

the opportunity to learn from quality faculty have become more motivated to be

excellent professionals.‖

2. Highly Qualified Students

Interviewees also emphasized the importance highly qualified students as a critical

feature of high-quality programs. Interviewees frequently described highly qualified

students as full-time students who were committed to education and had ambitions for a

successful life.

Actions

Faculty and administrators invest in two actions to attract and retain highly qualified

students. First, faculty and administrators establish admission polices based on the

institutional mission and on pre-established quality standards to attract and retain full-

time students who will invest in their learning. Second, university authorities introduce

a national admission test to improve current admission standards.

68

68

To illustrate the first action, a business professor at PUCE told me about how the

admission process has pre-established standards to attract and retain more full-time

students. In his words:

In terms of introducing pre-established standards to the current

admission process, we are defining standards based on accreditation and

International Organization for Standards (ISO) norms and standards.

Then we will be able to attract and keep more excellent students.

A business professor at USFQ described the well-organized admission process

implemented by faculty and university authorities to attract and retain full-time

students. In his words, ―The admission process is well-structured at this university

because we introduce planned actions to attract good students.‖

Nevertheless, a biotechnology professor at USFQ—a professor that received a Ph.D. at

a prestigious university of the United States—said:

What really affects students‘ learning and motivation in several

Ecuadorian universities is the lack of pre-established admission

standards or admission tests. We professors have to struggle, trying to

introduce high competitive standards among our students. If standards

are not higher, students do not find reasons for being the best.

To illustrate the second action, a Director from CONESUP stated that although private

universities such as PUCE and USFQ have well-structured admission processes, most

Ecuadorian and Latin American universities need improvement in this area. He said:

Ecuadorian universities need to establish minimum standards to attract

full-time quality students. Once those minimum standards have been

accomplished, universities should move to higher standards to admit

highly qualified students. A national admission test would help to

improve current admission standards.

69

69

Positive Outcomes

Promoting higher academic standards among students has significant consequences for

student outcomes. First, highly qualified students motivate one another to invest their

best effort to achieve high academic standards. Second, highly-qualified students

encouraged each other to become more fully devoted to their professions. As a

biotechnology student at USFQ put it, ―Since we were admitted in a quality program

that has pre-established standards, we students feel motivated to invest our best effort to

achieve high-academic standards and improve our intellectual level.‖

A former Academic Administrator and business professor at PUCE added, ―When

students perceive they have been admitted due to quality standards and have

participated in quality programs, they encouraged one another to become more fully

devoted to their professions.‖

Similarly, a biology professor at USFQ told me, ―Since our students experienced pre-

established standards to be admitted at USFQ, they encourage one another to become

more fully devoted to their learning.‖

Cluster Two: Learning-Centered Cultures

Having learned through my research that high-quality programs are anchored in self-

critical and self-reflective cultures, I introduced learning-centered cultures as the second

cluster of attributes in my study. In this cluster, I identified four attributes of high-

quality programs: shared program direction focused on learning; real-world learning

experiences; a reading-centered culture; and a risk-taking environment. After defining

the attributes, I examined the actions that program administrators, faculty, employers,

alumni, and students take to develop and sustain the attributes within their programs

and, in turn, discuss the ways in which student growth and development were enhanced.

1.Shared Program Direction Focused on Learning

70

70

Throughout my study, I learned that in high-quality programs, faculty, administrators,

students, alumni, and employers are fundamental in building a shared program direction

focused on learning. Participants engage in a philosophy and a set of tools for

identifying and improving processes that lead to a better focus on learning.

Actions

Similar to those actions in Haworth and Conrad‘s (1997: 61 – 63) ―shared program

direction,‖ I found that faculty and administrators use two strategies to give expression

to this attribute. First, faculty and administrators invite other program stakeholders to

join with them in constructing a shared program direction focused on learning. Second,

university authorities motivate faculty, students, alumni, and employers to participate in

assessment efforts in which they study the fit between their program‘s teaching and

learning activities and its overall direction.

To illustrate the first action, a Dean at PUCE told me that his school started to work

closely with other program stakeholders to articulate shared direction. In his words:

We have begun meeting with twenty-five other program stakeholders

and employers in order to re-define the shared-program direction focused

on learning. Thirty professors have been working with students, alumni,

and administrators to review and adapt the recommendations given by

other program stakeholders.

To exemplify the action for the second attribute, an employer who was invited by PUCE

to participate in the assessment to study the fit between program teaching and learning

activities and its overall direction, told me:

It is very important that the business school at PUCE invite employers to

join faculty, administrators, alumni, and students in order to assess how

well the teaching and learning activities and their overall direction are

preparing students to become qualified professionals.

Positive Outcomes

71

71

Again, similar to Haworth and Conrad‘s (1997) research, two positive outcomes

were defined during my study. First, shared program direction helped students to

develop more well-defined professional identities in programs in which

participants share a ―common focus.‖ Second, shared program direction focused

on learning and helped students to develop a clear sense of professional

direction and a better consciousness of where and how they wish to invest their

professional energies upon graduation.

A biology professor at PUCE with a graduate degree from a prestigious research

university in the United States told me that shared program direction helped

students to develop more well-defined professional characteristics with a

common focus. He stated:

Students, who experience shared program direction, are becoming better-defined

professionals with an understanding of the common focus as part of their education

experiences and professional practices. In the United States universities, students, who

experience shared program direction, are more informed of their professions and where

to invest their professional energies. I wish Ecuadorian universities would provide more

shared program direction to their students.

2. Real-World Learning Experiences

Based on evidence from the 60 interviewees, I identified real-world learning

experiences as the second attribute in learning-centered cultures. Students in real-world

learning experiences were assessed and evaluated through specific learning skills as

well as through the presentation of real-life projects for the private sector and industries.

Actions

72

72

To provide real-world learning experiences, I identified two actions: first, stakeholders

who designed real-world curricula focus on the development of learning skills through

case analysis; second, faculty and administrators who provide experiential learning

through the development of real-world projects for industries.

As to the first action, one interviewee emphasized the importance of case analysis as

part of real-world learning experiences. The interviewee said, ―Faculty and

administrators at Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana organized the learning process

based on real-world learning experiences through case analysis.‖

As for the second action, a high administrator at USFQ told me that students use case

analysis and develop new products for industries. In his own words:

Our students experience real-world learning experiences through case

analysis. Our students also develop their own projects that become real-

world projects for industries. To illustrate, faculty members and students

are applying their projects as part of new industries. One project involves

the beer industry with two new beers ―Paquita” and “San Pancho;”

other projects are part of the food industry (chocolate and pasta).

Positive Outcomes

Students‘ real-world learning experiences increased their interest and commitment to

their profession. A biology student at PUCE told me, ―PUCE has created the

biodiversity and environment center where we connect our learning experiences and

develop real projects that guide us toward our professions.‖

A female professional from Ecuador with a degree in marketing told me that she

developed projects that guided her to her profession. She stated:

When I was a student, I had the opportunity to connect my learning

experience with projects (products). One of the products that I developed

with my team was selected by the university and by a private business.

The name of the product was Alpina. Currently, a food industry is selling

73

73

our product with the name Avena Alpina. That project was a good start

for my professional life.

3. Reading-Centered Culture

I found that a reading-centered culture is also a vital component of highly-qualified

programs. University authorities, faculty, administrators, and stakeholders told me that

they need to promote a more reading-centered culture. If universities promoted a

reading-centered culture, the cultural level of society improved because people

developed more critical thinking skills to face realities. If students in Latin American

countries, particularly in Ecuador, read more, they would develop more creative

thinking and feel able to contribute with new ideas.

Actions

Educational stakeholders agreed that education in Latin America, particularly in

Ecuador, must promote a reading-centered culture. Therefore, university authorities

advanced a reading-centered culture through introducing new policies such as providing

stipends for books as part of students‘ tuition. University authorities, faculty, and

administrators at PUCE and USFQ explained me how professors know that they need to

promote more reading among faculty, administrators, and particularly students. Students

must come prepared to classes. Every class session needs to introduce discussions based

on previous readings.

Along the same vein, a business professor at PUCE stated, ―Due to new policies to

improve reading, our students are becoming better readers; now they participate in

discussions based on readings. The usual reading resistance has decreased.‖

Positive Outcomes

Since stakeholders were putting forth major efforts to promote a reading-centered

culture in Latin America, particularly in Ecuador, students were developing more

creative and critical thinking skills as well as contributing new ideas grounded in

74

74

knowledge. Interviewees told me that students feel able to contribute new ideas to the

development of the country. A Latin American interviewee from Universidad José

Simeón Cañas, El Salvador, told me, ―Since I attended a good program that promoted

reading, I became a more critical thinker. I started to view things from different

perspectives, and I started to base decisions on knowledge.‖

In the same tone, two Latin American interviewees, one from Chile and the other from

Colombia, explained to me that when students read good stuff during their education,

they become a more critical thinker.

4. Suportive and Risk-Taking Environment

A suportive and risk-taking environment is the fourth attribute of learing-centered

cultures. Faculty and administrators told me that they provide students with supportive

environments because they want students to feel safe to take risks during their learning

experiences.

Actions

Faculty and administrators introduced one action to assure a suportive risk-taking

environment. They developed a supportive learning environment in which students felt

confident to take risks by questioning paradigms and extant knowledge. A university

authority at USFQ told me the importance of creating confusions in a safe environment

in students in order to provoke them to take risks. He stated:

A risk-taking environment must create confusions in students within safe

conditions, so they can question dogmas and paradigms in order to

search for the truth. That is the kind of education our students are

receiving at this university.

In the same tone, a business student at USFQ added:

Whenever our Chancellor or Vice-Chancellor gives us a conference or a

speech, repeatedly they motivate us to take risks and search for the truth.

75

75

Our Chancellor‘s speeches motivate not only students but also faculty

and administrators.

A business student at USFQ told me that her professors encourage students to take risks

by providing them with a supportive learning environment. She told me, ―Our

professors are cool because they provide us with a supportive environment where we

feel confident to take risks and explore new ideas.‖

Similarly, a biotechnology student at USFQ affirmed:

I like to confront knowledge because I am motivated by my professors to

do so. They provide students with supportive environments where we

feel safe to take risks and express our opinions. Comparing this action to

the conservative attitude of people in the outside world, we feel

encouraged.

Two Biotechnology students at USFQ explained to me the difference between a risk-

taking environment that challenges students to explore new ideas and a criticizing

enviroment that inhibits students. The two students stated:

(Student 1): Generally, we have been accustomed to the outside world‘s

mentality where people criticize others.

(Student 2): We believe that criticizing students jeopardizes their

development because students can feel intimidated and blocked.

Nevertheless, faculty and administrators encourage us to explore new

ideas and confront realities.

Alumni and several students at USFQ affirmed, ―The Chancellor and our professors

generally encourage us to question knowledge. This action motivates us to search for

the truth. We do not panic to take risks within unknown circumstances.‖

Even so, a risk-taking environment was an undeveloped attribute of high-quality

programs in most Latin American universities, particularly ones in Ecuador. For

76

76

example, one of the leaders of the National College Students Association (FENASUPE)

told me:

It would be nice if professors could provide us with supportive and safe

environments and strategies where we could take risks and express our

opinions. In turn, we could become more qualified professionals, more

competitive, with vision, open minds, and new views.

Positive Outcomes

Students who took risks within the context of a supportive environment developed two

positive outcomes. First, students who engaged in risk-taking activities developed a

more critical thinking attitude to face realities and to confront what was already known

with the unknown. Second, students having studied in a risk-taking environment

became more empowered professionals.

As for the first positive outcome, three students at USFQ, one from the biotechnology

school and two from the business school, told me that within the context of a supportive

environment, we feel encouraged to confront knowledge. We do not accept whatever is

written or said. We have become more critical thinkers and more skilled to search for

the truth.

ne business student in her senior year at USFQ said, ―Our professors have inspired us to

become more competitive by avoiding a mediocre lifestyle. Professors have encouraged

us to have a lifelong learning attitude within a risk-taking environment.‖ As for the

second positive outcome, a business student at USFQ told me how she had become a

more empowered professional because her professors engaged students in risk-taking

activities. In her own words:

Our professors engage us in risk-taking activities. As a consequence, we

become more empowered professionals, with motivation and courage to

take risks. In addition, our professors encourage us to exceed our limits

and to become more empowered professionals.

77

77

In the same vein, a Latin American interviewee from Pontificia Universidad Católica of

Peru said, ―The good thing is that my professors created a risk-taking environment.

Therefore, I felt much more encouraged to advance my professional education.‖


Like Haworth and Conrad‘s (1997) ―Engagement Theory of Academic Program

Quality,‖ I identified interactive teaching and learning as the third cluster of attributes in

my theory of quality. Also, I came to understand that high-quality programs had been

developed around an interactive communication process.

1. Integrative Learning: Theory with Practice, Self with Subject

Again, like Haworth and Conrad‘s (1997) theory, interactive learning – theory with

practice, self with subject – was a very important attribute of high-quality programs. I

learned from interviewees that the learning experience was enhanced when students

understood the relevance of what they learned and knew how to connect knowledge to

the outside world.

Actions

Faculty, administrators, and students take one action to promote integrated learning in

their programs. They develop hands-on learning through teamwork activities that

connect theory with practice. As for the above-mentioned action, faculty,

administrators, and students told me that they were developing hands-on learning

through teamwork projects that helped them to connect theory with practice. To

illustrate, a Dean at USFQ said:

Faculty and administrators are promoting hands-on learning through

teamwork that helps students to develop projects. Currently, our students

are developing agribusiness projects, and they are learning to connect

theory with practice.

78

78

In the same vein, a United States businessman living in Costa Rica, based on his

undergraduate experience at the University of California, Santa Cruz, recommended that

large Latin American universities organize students in small groups through teamwork

activities. In that way, students can better connect theory with practice. Thus, he shared

with me his experience:

As a student, I was an integral part of my university although it

became a very large college. One of the most significant actions in

order to help us connect theory with practice and foster

communication between faculty, administrators, and students was the

fact that our classes were organized in small groups through

teamwork. Therefore, I had the opportunity to connect theory with

practice.

Positive Outcomes

Two positive outcomes resulted from integrative learning. First, students, who

participated in integrative learning activities moved toward a more practical and logical

problem-solving attitude. Second, students became more adept at communicating

theoretical and technical knowledge to others by using interpersonal skills including

respect for others‘ ideas.

As for the first positive outcome, a Latin American interviewee from Colombia told me

that students who had participated in integrative learning through interdisciplinary

teams approached a more critical thinking and logical problem-solving attitude. In his

words:

Since I study in a program that was organized through various hands-on

projects, workshops, or fieldwork, I have become a more practical and

logical person; I have developed more critical thinking. I usually worked

within interdisciplinary teams. Thus, I have become able to connect

theory with practice; it means that I am more skilled when developing

projects.

79

79

As for the second positive outcome, a Latin American interviewee from Universidad

Nacional Facultad de Minas, Colombia, told me that when students are exposed to team

activities, they became more adept at communicating theoretical and technical

knowledge to others by using interpersonal skills including respect for others‘ ideas.

Therefore, he stated, ―I have experienced that working in teams as well as

independently has helped me to communicate both theoretical knowledge and technical

knowledge as well. I have become a professional with an analytical mind and tolerance

and respect for others‘ ideas.‖

2. Exclusive Tutoring and Mentoring

Exclusive tutoring and mentoring emerged as an important attribute of high-quality

programs in my study. Exclusive means that a limited number of students receive

tutoring; in other words, exclusive reffers to a more personalized education. I also

learned that exclusive tutoring and mentoring has been introduced gradually at Latin

American higher education institutions over the past five years.

Actions

Three actions advance exclusive tutoring and mentoring. First, professors give more

personalized education within a lightly interactive professor-student relationship.

Second, professors meet regularly with students to provide feedback on their

professional and personal development. Third, leaders, administrators, and faculty

develop supportive environments for tutoring and mentoring students.

As for the fist action, a business alumnus at USFQ told me:

I liked the personalized education that I received at USFQ, I never felt

like a name or number in the student roster because my professors

always called me by my name; consequently, I felt much more

motivated within that friendly professor-student relationship.

80

80

Professors met regularly with students at USFQ to provide feedback on their

professional and personal development. A high administrator at USFQ stated:

Our professors, especially full-time professors at this university, are

required to devote at least two hours daily to meet with their students.

This action creates academic interactions between professors and

students. Students receive feedback on their academic progress and

personal development.

In addition, a business student at USFQ told me that through personalized tutoring and

mentoring, professors knew students‘ personal and professional interests and

motivations more profoundly. The student affirmed, ―Through exclusive tutoring and

mentoring our professors knew us better. Exclusive mentoring was important because

our professors understood better our professional and personal interests.‖

As for the third action, administrators and faculty developed supportive environments

for tutoring and mentoring students. Several students at USFQ said that they had

experienced a supportive environment where they had received tutoring and mentoring.

One of them affirmed:

Some good actions here are professors‘ openness to students through

tutoring and mentoring. Our professors provide us with a supportive and

friendly environment. They are always there when we, students, need

them.

Positive Outcomes

Two positive outcomes resulted from exclusive tutoring and mentoring. First, through

exclusive tutoring and mentoring students improved their self-confidence and self-

esteem. Second, students became aware of their weaknesses and engaged in a

continuous self-improvement process.

81

81

Four students, three from the business school and one from the biotechnology school at

USFQ, told me that since professors had been giving more personalized education

within a light interactive professor-student relationship, they were becoming more

confident. These four students agreed that their professors call them by their names and

treat them with respect; therefore, they improve their self-confidence and self-esteem.

In the same vein, a high administrator at USFQ stated:

Since it is a norm at USFQ to use our names and not titles within a light

interactive professor-student relationship, our students become more

confident; they elevate their self-esteem. Many people in Ecuador have

been accustomed to treating others (students) as inferiors, and some

students have developed a sense of inferiority. We are working hard to

overcome those differences and improve people‘s self-confidence.

A biology student at PUCE explained to me the positive effect resulting from professors

caring about students. She stated, ―Some of my professors really care about my

professional education. That action helps me to trust them; my stress level is decreasing;

my self-esteem is improving.‖

As a second positive outcome, a biotechnology alumnus who graduated from USFQ

stated, ―Since my professors gave me feedback through tutoring and mentoring, I

became aware of my weaknesses, and I looked for ways to engage in a continuous self-

improvement process.‖

A high administrator at USFQ said, ―Because our students meet regularly with their

professors in order to receive academic and personal feedback, they are becoming more

aware of their weaknesses. Our students are learning to learn.‖


Like Haworth and Conrad (1997), I identified connected program requirements as the

fourth cluster of attributes in my theory of program quality. From interviewees‘

responses I learned that faculty challenged students to develop a more mature and

82

82

unified understanding of their profession through two attributes of connected program

requirements: planned breadth and depth course work and tangible products.

1. Planned Breadth and Depth Course Work

I identified planned breadth and depth course work as another important attribute of

program quality. Through planned breadth and depth course work faculty and

administrators require students to complete a program that embraces core and

specialized course work. This attribute positively affected students‘ development.

Actions

Faculty and administrators use one action as for planned breadth and depth course work.

They develop core and specialized course work requirements in order to advance a

wider education in students. To illustrate this action, two business professors at USFQ

told me how the academic program encompasses core courses as well as specialized

classes. In their words:

(Professor 1): Our students are learning subjects from a more planned

breadth and depth course work. Our students are learning more about

core and general subjects, including national and international cultures.

(Professor 2): Our business program has a good balance between core

and specialized courses according to their professional life interests. In

addition, it includes cooking, languages, and history as part of the core

course work.

Positive Outcomes

Since faculty members and administrators develop core and specialized course work

requirements in order to advance a wider education in students, students became deeper

thinkers with wider visions who respected others‘ ideas. They developed a more holistic

understanding of knowledge and practice which improved their personal and

professional lives.

83

83

As for this positive outcome, professors and administrators at USFQ emphasized the

importance of planned breadth and depth course work. As a result, students viewed the

world through different lenses and became more open-minded. A business professor at

USFQ stated, ―Our students are achieving more open minds; they feel like ―free

citizens‖ because they are exposed to a more planned breadth and depth course work.‖

Four students from the business school at PUCE agreed that they would have liked to

receive more planned breadth and depth course work with a more humanistic focus. A

humanistic focus would provide students with wider visions and respect for others‘

ideas, integrity, honesty, and trustworthiness. As they explained:

(Student 1): By including more humanistic education into core

courses, we develop more values (integrity, honesty, and

trustworthiness), values necessary to confront the corruption facing

developing countries, particularly Ecuador.

(Student 2): We are more oriented to be good business professionals;

this is fine; however, we need to learn more from core courses that

include arts, cultures, and community service.

(Student 3): We have good business courses here; however, I would

like to receive other courses besides business ones, such as sports,

because in a healthy body there is always a healthy mind.

(Student 4): We are solid in our business administration program

because we receive more specialized course work; nevertheless, it

would be good if faculty and administrators balanced more between

core and specialized courses. Then, we, students, can view the world

through different lenses and with more open-minds.

2. Tangible Product

84

84

I identified tangible product as another attribute of high-quality programs. During my

study, faculty and administrators designed tangible products such as theses and research

projects for students to complete their programs.

Actions

From interviewees‘ responses, I identified two actions. First, faculty, and administrators

design tangible products to complete their programs. Second, faculty, and

administrators support students throughout these culmination activities by providing

guidance and feedback as needed.

As for the first action, a high administrator at PUCE emphasized how biology students

were expected to culminate their program studies with a thesis. He stated:

At the undergraduate level, our biology students are expected to do and

defend their own theses, as well as at the graduate level. The biology

school at PUCE has prestige in Latin America because of its theses and

research projects.

A biology professor at PUCE told me that faculty members were always supporting

students throughout the culmination of their theses by providing them with guidance

and feedback as needed. In his words, ―Every student working on his or her thesis has a

professor that guides one by one their thesis. We provide our students with guidance

and feedback in a personalized way. In that way, we guarantee the culmination of their

thesis.‖

Positive Outcomes

Tangible product had two positive outcomes on students. First, students became more

confident and independent professionals by assuming major responsibility for their

theses. Second, students became more analytical thinkers with a wider perspective on

their professions.

85

85

Interviewees also agreed in the positive outcome for students when conducting research

in business and industry-related issues because students became more confident and

independent professionals. They assumed responsibility in completing their projects,

theses, reports, and/or presentations. A high administrator at PUCE stated:

Since our professors invite students to work with them in research

projects that industries or business sectors provide funds for, students

assume responsibilities because they feel as an important component of

such research projects; and they have the opportunity to apply the results

in their thesis.

A senior biology student at PUCE explained to me the positive outcome resulting from

her research experience and professor guidance as important factors to the culmination

of her thesis. She said:

I am working with my professor on a research project that has funds

from a French industry. He is always guiding me as well as allowing

me to think analytically from what I am doing at the research lab. I

am learning from him as well as from this experience. What is

really good is that I am applying the research results on my thesis.

This experience is also giving me a better perspective of what I

would like to do on my profession. This is great!


Like Haworth and Conrad (1997), I found that ―adequate resources provide an

important part of the foundation, upon which high-quality programs are built and

developed.‖43

Adequate resources, both monetary and non-monetary, contributed to

enhancing faculty and student ―investments in teaching and learning.‖ Interviewees

(faculty, administrators, and students) stated that adequate resources were an important

part of high-quality programs because they felt much better in a supportive environment

and, in turn, learn more.

43


86

86

1. Support for Students

Support for students could be seen in the form of scholarships, internships, grants,

loans, study-abroad opportunities, internships, and job opportunities after graduation.

Actions

Administrators and faculty in developing countries, especially in Ecuador, develop two

strategies to provide support for students. First, faculty and administrators support

students with funds for scholarships, grants, loans, and funds for study-abroad,

including agreements with the productive sector in order to provide students with job

openings and internships opportunities. Second, faculty, administrators, and employers

developed agreements and alliances for student internships and job opportunities after

graduation.

As for the first action, university authorities at PUCE told me that they had allocated

funds for students with fewer monetary resources when they demonstrated academic

quality. As they put it:

(A high administrator): We allocate funds for students who have few

monetary resources. Students are selected according to their economic

income and their academic records.

(Director 1): PUCE has a differentiated tuition plan. Students who have

more money pay more; students whose parents earn less, pay less.

(Director 2): We have a student affairs department that studies the real

income of our students in order to give them scholarships. Our

professors‘ children also receive partial tuition payment or total tuition

payment in the form of scholarships. Students that receive scholarships

have to demonstrate an excellent academic GPA in order to keep their

scholarships. PUCE also gives job opportunities and internships to

highly qualified students.

87

87

Faculty and administrators developed agreements with international universities in order

to provide students with study abroad opportunities. A high administrator at USFQ told

me:

USFQ has several agreements with international universities in order to

provide our students with study abroad opportunities. Our undergraduate

and graduate students have the opportunity to study in high-quality

international universities. These agreements include universities such

University of Michigan, University of Wisconsin – Madison, Boston

University, among others. Our students are admitted directly to doctoral

degree programs due to their academic quality.

I was able to interview a business student during his senior year, who had attended an

exchange program in the business school at the University of Wisconsin – Madison; he

expressed his experience at UW-Madison with pride by saying, ―I felt very competitive

at the University of Wisconsin – Madison because of the high-level of education that I

received at USFQ. I never experienced the feeling of being behind my classmates in

terms of academic achievement or English skills.‖

In the same vein, a Dean at USFQ affirmed, ―USFQ provides funds for scholarships for

professional education and academic training. Our faculty and students have the

opportunity to attend universities in countries such as the United States, China, Japan,

Spain, and others.‖ As for the second action, faculty, administrators, and employers

developed agreements and alliances for student internships as part of their program as

well as job opportunities after students‘ graduation. A Director at PUCE stated,

―Faculty and administrators develop agreements with funding organizations in order to

promote agreements for student internships and job opportunities after graduation.

Among those organizations are: World Bank, International Bank, and FUNDACYT.‖ 44

Positive Outcomes

44

FUNDACYT is an Ecuadorian organization that provides grants and scholarships for graduate studies

in science and technology. See more information at: http://www.fundacyt.org/

88

88

Since university authorities, faculty, and administrators had provided students with

funds in the form of scholarships and grants, they did not have to worry about economic

resources; thus, students invested their energies in achieving a better educational level,

and they developed a better sense of belonging and loyalty toward their universities. A

biology student at PUCE stated, ―Since funding organizations provide us money for our

internships and research projects, we become better biologists and more competitive

professionals.‖

When students experienced education in international universities, they became more

competitive with a higher level of self-respect and better understanding of other

cultures. A Dean at USFQ confirmed, ―Due to the exchange opportunities, our students

have acquired better knowledge and understanding of other cultures. They have

widened their views and have advanced in their way of thinking; they have improved

their academic quality and self-respect.‖

2. Support for Faculty

I found support for faculty as another important attribute of high-quality programs.

During my research, interviewees told me that more adequate monetary resources in the

form of remunerations and rewards motivated faculty to invest more quality time in

their teaching activities. While some university authorities thought that professors

devoted their time to teaching and research for reasons other than money, most

professors told me that they would have appreciated receiving better salaries and

monetary rewards for their quality teaching and research. If university authorities paid

better wages to faculty, greater faculty engagement would enrich students‘ outcomes.

Actions

University authorities support faculty through two actions. First, university authorities

allocated monetary resources for faculty remunerations and rewards structure based on

faculty quality and achievements. Second, university authorities supported faculty

publications by allocating monetary resources and sabbaticals.

89

89

As for the first action, a Dean at PUCE stated, ―We are developing a structure for

allocating more monetary resources for providing better remuneration to faculty as well

as a reward structure that recognizes good teaching practice.‖ A high administrator at

PUCE declared:

We hire highly-qualified professors; those who like to teach and for

whom salary is not the most important issue. Rather, it is status that

matters. Our professors should share the university‘s philosophy to

promote responsibility at the highest level and respect for human dignity

as part of the Catholic vision.

Allocating monetary resources for faculty remunerations is critical to improve

Ecuadorian universities. To illustrate, a biology professor at PUCE stated:

On this campus, university authorities along with financial authorities do

not allocate the necessary resources to recognize professors who devote

their full-time to teaching and research. Generally, people working for

the university administration are better paid. It seems that they do not

understand that faculty are the essential component of any higher

education institution; high-quality programs depend to a great extent on

high-quality faculty who should be highly-motivated both with monetary

and non-monetary recognitions. Therefore, they should be receiving

much better salaries and rewards.

Similarly, another biology professor at PUCE affirmed:

A negative aspect, almost all over the world, is that administrators are

trying to dominate academia; they are supposed to support the teaching,

learning, and research activities. This is a bureaucratic problem; the

administrative system is dominating universities instead of

administrating. Consequently, administrators are not providing enough

monetary resources for faculty salaries and rewards.

90

90

University authorities in some Ecuadorian universities have started to support faculty

publications and sabbaticals by allocating monetary resources. Nevertheless, this is an

action that still needs tremendous improvement. A biology alumnus at PUCE

emphasized:

The biology school established the Biodiversity and Environmental

Center with the purpose of supporting faculty publications and

sabbaticals. Through this center, industries allocate monetary

resources for research projects and publications. This is a very good

action because neither professors nor students have time to find

monetary resources. However, the monetary resources are not yet

enough.

A Director at PUCE told me about the actions that his university was taking in order to

promote more publications. In his words, ―University authorities are promoting more

research and, therefore, more publications. In order to achieve these goals, we are

signing out more agreements with external funding agencies such as the World Bank

and International Development Bank.‖

In the same vein, a Director of the Ecuadorian Higher Education Council (CONESUP)

stated, ―CONESUP and FUNDACYT should provide more monetary resources for

developing a team of researchers at the highest level; therefore, they could contribute

with more research and publications.‖

Positive Outcomes

Once professors had been appropriately rewarded, they invested their time in student

teaching and learning; therefore, students felt more satisfied with their educational

experiences and became even better professionals. This positive outcome still remains

not achieved

A second positive outcome resulting from my study states that students benefited from

faculty‘s quality preparation and publications by becoming more qualified

professionals. A biology student at PUCE stated that since some university authorities

91

91

had been providing monetary resources for promoting faculty and student involvement

in research and publications, they were participating in research projects and becoming

more qualified for their professional activity. In her words:

I feel happy because my professors invited me to participate in their

research projects; they provide me with the necessary materials and

books to advance my research. We, both professors and students, have

benefited from research; professors can publish more, and students have

gained knowledge and experience.

3. Support for Campus Infrastructure

Support for campus infrastructure was an important attribute of quality programs.

Faculty, administrators, students, and alumni participating in this study emphasized that

not only adequate facilities and equipment—such as laboratories, libraries, field related

equipment, classrooms with new technology facilities for teaching, equipment, and

supplies—but the beauty of the campus also contributed to quality programs.

Actions

Through the interview process, I learned that university authorities allocated monetary

resources to update laboratories, libraries (including virtual libraries), research stations,

laboratories, computers, and the necessary equipment and supplies to advance high-

quality programs. A Dean at PUCE acknowledged:

Our laboratories and libraries, regardless of monetary limitations,

provide good services to students. Libraries also provide students with

up-to-date scientific journals. These journal collections are considered

the largest Ecuadorian collection in the zoology area; that is a good tool

for research.

University authorities also invested in campus maintenance, innovation, and aesthetics.

A university authority at USFQ confirmed:

92

92

The physical facilities and their environment are very important to us.

Generally, we have been accustomed to ugly campuses; however, at

USFQ we provide money to build a beautiful campus because the more

beautiful campus becomes, the more beauty we demand.

Positive Outcomes

When university authorities support campus facilities such as computer laboratories and

libraries, students become more technically skilled to perform their jobs. To illustrate,

two students at USFQ explained to me about their technical skills when looking for

bibliographic materials. In their words:

(Student 1): USFQ provides us with excellent and very modern access to

information through the Internet, virtual libraries, conventional libraries,

and laboratories. I feel very satisfied with these campus facilities because

I am developing my technical skills to find any bibliographic material

here.

(Student 2): Whenever I need to write a paper that includes a

bibliographic research component, I feel less stressed because my

university has many bibliographic resources as well as computers where

I can write my papers. I do not panic using technology facilities

anymore. I feel much more skilled to perform any job related to my

career.

Students who had studied on beautiful campuses developed a sense of belonging toward

their universities. All USFQ students and faculty that participated in this study

confirmed that they felt very proud to invite visitors to come to their university because

of its quality and its beauty. In the same tone, alumni at USFQ added, ―Because we

studied in a beautiful environment, we felt more respected and our self-esteem

improved significantly.‖

93

93

CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In this concluding chapter, I devote one section to examining the literature that supports

my theory and another to examining the contributions that my work makes to our

theoretical understanding of high-quality programs. In the final section, I discuss the

implications of my study for advancing and maintaining high-quality programs in

developing countries.

Support for the Theory in the Literature

My theory finds strong support in Haworth and Conrad‘s (1997) ―Engagement Theory.‖

My theory also finds partial support in UNESCO‘s (2000 – 2002) ―Proposals and

Recommendations.‖ The first cluster of attributes—highly qualified participants—is

closely connected to cluster one—―diverse and engaged participants‖—of Haworth and

Conrad‘s ―Engagement Theory‖. The second, third, and fourth clusters of attributes of

my theory—learning-centered cultures, interactive teaching and learning, and connected

program requirements—are very similar to Haworth and Conrad‘s ―participatory

cultures,‖ ―interactive teaching and learning,‖ and ―connected programs.‖ In addition,

clusters two and three of my theory, particularly two attributes— ―shared-program

direction focused on learning‖ and ―interactive learning‖—are closely connected to

UNESCO‘s (2000 – 2002) ―Proposals and Recommendations.‖ To illustrate, UNESCO

emphasizes ―engaging faculty, students, administrators, and leaders of the community

by investing in shared program direction and active teaching and learning.‖

Finally, the fifth cluster—adequate resources—is likewise closely connected to

Haworth and Conrad‘s fifth cluster of attributes, as well as several of UNESCO‘s (2000

– 2002) ―Proposals and Recommendations.‖ Both emphasize the importance of

developing a reward structure that recognizes and motivates faculty to invest their

quality time in teaching and learning that, in turn, enriches the quality of students‘

learning.

94

94

Contributions of the Theory of High-Quality Programs

While I used grounded theory, my study was guided by Haworth and Conrad‘s (1997)

―Engagement Theory of High-Quality Programs.‖ In so doing, I identified 13 attributes

of high-quality programs. Eleven of these are closely connected to Haworth and

Conrad‘s theory and the other two attributes—real-world learning experiences and a

reading-centered culture—make the signature theoretical contributions of my study.

Real-world learning experiences encourage the active involvement of stakeholders—

faculty, administrators, students, alumni, and employers—in designing curricula with

real-world learning experiences that result in positive student outcomes. The second

attribute—a reading-centered culture—has never before been identified in the literature.

In Latin American countries, such as Ecuador, students must read more to advance their

learning. After all, the primary purpose of higher learning is to provide students ―with

new insights‖ and ―enriching learning experiences that have positive effects on their

development.‖45

In order to connect my theory with the future of high-quality programs in

Latin American and Ecuadorian universities, I believe the that if all stakeholders

(university authorities, faculty, administrators, students, alumni, and employers)

along with state governors engage in the pursuit of ―enriching learning

experiences that have positive effects on students development‖ as the rule of

life and not as the exception—in concert with the program attributes I have

identified—high-quality programs will become the most important component

of Latin American universities, particularly Ecuadorian universities.

High-Quality Programs in Latin American Universities: Key Differences in

Mission of the Universities and the Attributes of Quality Programs

While the theory finds much in common with Haworth and Conrad‘s theory on program

quality in developing countries, it is important to highlight the key difference in the

mission of universities that, in turn, is linked to differences in what high-quality means

in developing countries. Significantly, most Latin American universities are focused

45


95

95

mainly on teaching, whereas universities in the United States focus on teaching,

research, and service.

There are several major differences between Haworth and Conrad‘s theory and the

theory developed in this study. In my theory, I found that four key attributes are even

more important in Ecuador and, possibly, other developing countries: highly-qualified

faculty, highly-qualified students, reading-centered cultures, and real-world learning

experiences. These differences are significant, and they have implications as discussed

in the recommendations that follow.

Recommendations

Latin American and Ecuadorian university authorities, faculty, administrators, and

students in general, and those from Ecuador in particular, need to advance their

academic programs by promoting the attributes of high-quality programs similar to

those advanced in this study. I provide the following recommendations that parallel the

clusters of attributes of my theory.

Cluster One: Highly Qualified Participants

Both highly qualified professors and highly qualified students are critical in universities

in developing countries. To this end, university authorities need to:

Hire and retain professors with doctoral degrees. To attract and retain highly

qualified faculty, universities should adopt actions such as: (1) crafting hiring

policies to attract highly qualified faculty with first-rate graduate educations; (2)

clarifying general tenure standards; (3) reallocating funds to develop reward

structures to recognize faculty achievement as well as to pay professors

competitive salaries; and (4) adopt a comprehensive evaluation system.

Establish detailed rules about what constitutes highly qualified faculty.

Universities should establish their standards based on educational level

(graduate degrees); teaching experience, including quality and effectiveness of

teaching; research (academic publications); and service. Define general tenure

96

96

standards based on evidence of scholarly ability in one‘s areas of academic

expertise.

Promote alliances with international universities in order to prepare more

professors with Ph.D. degrees. To that end, organize teams of researchers across

Ecuadorian universities who will contribute new ideas to advance research,

science, technology, and program quality in particular.

Ensure productive faculty by attracting professors who have scientific

knowledge in the teaching area, a passion to teach, contribute to tangible

learning products such as publications, advance science and technology through

research, participate in community service, and contribute to the development of

a learning community.46

As Amacher and Meiners (2004) emphasize:

The problem is to get faculty interested in teaching better and politicking

less or, in a few cases, in teaching better and doing a little less research.

From the perspective of the institution, the most destructive faculty is the

one who does not teach well, does little or no research, but spends

significant time on committees and campus politics. These faculty are

administrators‘ nightmares.

Review admission policies and tests to attract students who are more

qualified. Higher education should be more selective in terms of

academic quality. ―Selective‖ means qualified, not elitist.

Universities must define admission standards to engage high-quality

students. A national test is one of the actions to identify students‘

strengths and weaknesses.

46 Clark Kerr (1960s) defines the learning community as the ―triumph of the Multipurpose University.‖

The learning community model draws primarily from three strains of history: from the British tradition of

high quality training for a select group of undergraduates; from the German tradition of research; and

third, from the American genius for service to many. All these traditions have influenced the learning

communities‘ model.

Haworth and Conrad (1997: 75) state that learning communities enrich students‘ growth and development

in two major ways. First, the collegial interaction that students had with one another and with faculty

strengthened their communication and teamwork skills; second, students developed a greater appreciation

of and respect for the value of collaborative approaches to inquiry, problem solving, and leadership.

97

97

Cluster Two: Learning-Centered Cultures

The attributes nested within cluster two—―learning-centered cultures‖—are a shared

program direction focused on learning, real-world learning experiences, a reading-

centered culture, and a risk-taking environment. When students are exposed to a shared

program direction focused on learning and real-world learning experiences, they can

attain a better education, develop greater respect for diversity, and find the courage to

confront corruption that many developing countries are facing. Learning-centered

cultures will give students a wider vision of the world and a distinctive perspective of

their own cultures.

The following are my recommendations regarding ―learning-centered cultures‖:

In order to serve all cultures, Latin American universities must formulate

educational policies that support shared program direction focused on learning

as well as a more diversified curricula.

Engage students in a reading-centered culture. In such a culture, students can

become critical thinkers when they read more; they participate in discussions;

and they can develop a more intellectually curious attitude. Stipends for books

as part of the tuition would be a good action to take in order to improve a

reading-centered culture among Latin American professors, administrators, and

students. Repeatedly, one of the most significant findings of my study was the

urgent need to promote meaningful reading. University authorities ought to

select the readings that help students to develop a wider vision of the world and

a deeper knowledge of their professions.

Provide supportive and safe environments where students feel confident to take

risks and engage in critical dialogues. Professors in developing countries must

be better prepared to lead critical discussions because this action requires in-

depth and in-breadth learning, knowledge, and practice. Most interviewees

believed that a risk-taking environment in which students felt confident to take

risks helped students‘ learning, development, and growth. The students that I

interviewed told me that they felt much more confident when administrators and

professors treated them with respect and trust.

98

98

Promote faculty committees to determine shared program direction focused on

learning and reward faculty for their contributions to that shared program

direction.

Define core curricula carefully. University authorities, faculty, and

administrators need to ensure that students have the ability to choose among a

broad course offering.


Both teaching and learning are a collaborative process; the responsibility to advance

learning becomes shared by faculty, administrators, and students. The attributes within

cluster three are: ―interactive learning: theory with practice, self with subject‖ and

exclusive tutoring and mentoring.

My recommendations to advance these attributes include:

Undergraduate programs need to engage everyone in the pursuit of attributes of

high quality through teamwork. Small teams work well in order to attain hands-

on learning. Students organized in teamwork activities will develop a shared

vision. ―A unifying, guiding, and distinctive vision is the foundation on which a

‗house of quality‘ is built,‖ according to Seymour (1992: 60).

Latin American universities very much need devoted professors: professors who

engage in tutoring and mentoring activities. Universities need to introduce

tutoring and mentoring as part of professors‘ responsibilities when they are

hired. Faculty salaries should also include a percentage for tutoring and

mentoring.

During my research, I found that students needed to receive more tutoring and

mentoring from their professors. Therefore, professors must devote more quality

and quantity time to students to assure their positive learning outcomes,

development, and growth.


99

99

―Connected program requirements‖ encompass ―planned breadth and depth course

work‖ and ―tangible products.‖ In order to advance these attributes, my

recommendations are:

Introduce planned breadth and depth curricula. In this way, students will develop

a more integrated education. Quality programs should define pre-planned and

coherent course succession because in the learning process everything needs to

be connected.

Tangible products are important because students become better professionals

when they have the opportunity to culminate their studies with products that

could guide them as to how to develop projects in their future professions.

Therefore, faculty and administrators should promote tangible products under

their guidance.


Adequate Resources, is an important component of a high-quality program. University

authorities, faculty, and administrators should make their best effort to provide support

for students, support for faculty, and support for campus infrastructure. My

recommendations are as follows:

Allocate monetary resources for more scholarships and grants to students who

genuinely deserve and need them.

Provide students with more internships and job opportunities. Students

sometimes feel isolated when they need to find jobs; they also lack experience

because they have received a predominately theoretical education. There should

be strong connections between theory and practice.

Allocate monetary resources for faculty salaries. This is another major issue

facing developing countries. Latin American countries, in particular Ecuador de

not provide faculty members either with competitive salaries or with reward

structures that recognize their good practices. Professors too often lose their

motivation without supportive resource structures, and that results in a genuine

threat to the advancement of high-quality programs.

100

100

Support for campus infrastructure seems to be advancing in some Latin

American countries, but libraries and laboratories are still very limited compared

to libraries and laboratories in developed countries.

If Latin American universities implement my recommendations, particularly in

Ecuadorian universities, I envision a better future for our universities. That is, Latin

American universities will become accountable to society by guaranteeing their students

high-quality programs, which will assure more sustainable development within each

country. In brief, I believe that these recommendations would revolutionize Latin

America‘s current higher education system in a positive way by encouraging Latin

American universities to compete with universities in developed countries.

101

101

APPENDIX A

The focus of my dissertation is defining the attributes of high-quality programs;

however, part of the data resulting from the interview process belonged to attributes of

high-quality universities.

During the interview process, interviewees exceeded the guiding questions of my thesis

(What program attributes in universities in developing countries contribute to positive

learning outcomes for students?) because they were concerned about higher education

quality according to a holistic approach. Thus, I am introducing Appendix A in order to

inform the readers about the attributes of high-quality universities resulting from the

data I gathered.

In order to organize data around high-quality universities, I followed Haworth and

Conrad‘s (1997) Theory of High-Quality Programs. I used the ―constant comparative

method.‖ As I did with my theory, data were coded and categorized by clusters. To meet

this end, I identified one cluster ―University-Wide Educational Leadership,‖ and three

attributes: effective leadership practices, interdisciplinary problem-based-research

teams, and solid connections between society and the university.

This topic remains open for further studies, advancement, and testing of high-quality

universities in developing countries. Below is Table 6 with the new cluster of attributes

of high-quality universities in developing countries.

102

102

Table 6

Attributes of High-Quality Universities

In Developing Countries

Cluster One

University Wide Educational Leadership


Effective Leadership

Practices

University authorities,

faculty, administrators, and

students practice strategic

quality management and

strategic planning in their

universities.


faculty, and administrators

invite leaders to identify new

paradigms related to university

educational leadership.

University authorities join

together to define the

orientation of university

programs with more liberal

arts components.

University authorities and

society promote institutional

self-evaluation and

accreditation for continuous

quality improvement.

Students create shared vision and

become more strategic thinkers. They

become able to develop strategic plans

at their jobs.

Students understand the

importance to keep academia

separated from political issues; they

reject politicking activism on campus;

and they become critical thinkers able

to contribute with solutions to

problems that challenge developing

countries

Students and alumni acquire

social consciousness, more

appreciation for their own cultural

backgrounds, and improved self-

esteem. They develop more sensitivity

to diversity and cultural differences.

When students trust the quality of

their universities, they improve their

self-confidence and professional skills.

Interdisciplinary

Problem-Based Research


educational leaders, faculty,

Students become researchers with

skills to contribute to the advancement

103

103

Teams administrators, alumni,

students, and employers join

together to establish teams of

researchers.

of science, technology, and society.

Solid Connections

between Society and the

University

Educational leaders,

faculty and administrators

introduce social work and

community service into all

programs.

Faculty, students and

administrators work in

university extension programs

within their communities.

Students acquire cultural

versatility, social consciousness, more



esteem.

Students learn how to contribute

to improving the quality life in their

communities.

Cluster One: University Wide Educational Leadership

Universities in developing countries, particularly in Ecuador, need to improve this

attribute of high-quality universities. This attribute included effective leadership

practices, interdisciplinary problem-based research teams, and solid connections

between society and the university.

1. Effective Leadership Practices

Educational leaders have a historical role in their society because every higher

educational institution should guide the advancement and progress of the country.

Actions

University authorities, faculty, administrators, and students joined together in

developing four actions. First, university authorities, faculty, administrators, and

students practiced strategic quality management and strategic planning in their

104

104

universities. Second, university authorities, faculty, and administrators invited leaders to

identify new paradigms related to university educational leadership. Third, university

authorities joined to define the orientation of university programs. Fourth, university

authorities and society promoted institutional self-evaluation and accreditation for

continuous quality improvement. These actions helped university authorities, faculty,

and administrators to identify cause-effect relationships of challenges that characterize

university leadership practices.

As for the first action, university authorities, faculty, administrators, and students told

me that they should participate in strategic quality leadership. One alumnus from the

business school at PUCE added:

When I was a student, I felt that we were not involved in actions such as

university planning to promote a high-quality university. Generally, few

university authorities, administrators, and professors took actions. It

would have been better if we had had the opportunity to take actions for

improving the quality of education.

As for the second action, university leaders told me that in order to guarantee an

effective leadership, they ought to adapt to changes. A biology student at PUCE said:

Many university authorities used to demonstrate resistance to change;

however, when USFQ created its biotechnology school, PUCE was

pressed by the competition and started to change and become more

competitive. Now that my school has projects and contracts with

international organizations and the state, we see a positive change.

People here at PUCE used to wait for the money to come.

In the same vein, a university authority at USFQ told me that an effective leadership

practice must promote new paradigms. In his words:

We are inviting leaders of the country to identify new paradigms related

to university educational leadership. This is not a traditional university;

105

105

this is a university patterned after the United States model; a model

based on liberal arts and general education. We want to stop the

instruction paradigm. In so doing, we need quality components such as

highly qualified faculty. Faculty who share this philosophical

background, faculty with humanistic education, and only those

professors who have experienced their education in those systems—

liberal art education—holding undergraduate and graduate degrees from

United States universities—professors highly qualified with Ph.D.

degrees and who have lived the concept of liberal arts—can contribute to

quality programs.

Faculty and administrators at new universities in Latin America, particularly in

Ecuador, questioned the Napoleonic model. They were promoting more current,

prestigious, and more successful educational models that included changes and

innovations in academic programs and curricula. One of the interviewees from El

Salvador, who is an alumnus from the business field said:

Our universities in developing countries need to disconnect from the Napoleonic Model

and incorporate interdisciplinary education with more general education and liberal arts

into all programs. Interdisciplinary education should introduce philosophy, sociology,

psychology, and economics. As a business administrator, I believe that general

education helped me to develop a more social consciousness based on a theoretical

framework. I am able to understand much better the context in which our countries are

acting. The most important part of my college education was the connection between

integral education—general education—with professional education. That was a good

program because I have become a more integrated professional.

Aleader of the National Universities and Polytechnic Schools Federation (FENAUPE)

stated:

106

106

Currently, we, alumni and young professionals, are willing to bring new

ideas related to effective leadership practices into universities in order to

promote highly qualified universities.

Another student leader explained to me his perception of university leadership practices

by saying:

People with good intentions and good wishes are always present on

campuses. Nevertheless, goals are not reached with good intentions only.

Universities are the cornerstone for society and vice versa. People

dedicated to politicking and who are uninterested in the advancement of

quality education have increased in our universities and federations.

Also, there are authorities with good intentions; nonetheless, those

authorities do not have the ability to start international agreements and

alliances. Hence, many efforts have been frustrated.

As for the third action, interviewees told me that Latin American and Ecuadorian

universities need to introduce more liberal arts education. A university authority at

USFQ explained the benefits of liberal arts education as part of interdisciplinary

programs:

At USFQ, every undergraduate student has to learn subjects related to

liberal arts education. Students need to contrast and compare a

pyramidal-knowledge system rather than a cylindrical-knowledge

system; therefore, curricula have to reflect interdisciplinary program

characteristics through liberal arts education and other subjects related to

each profession. Students, during their college life, experience liberal

arts education through Socratic Seminars, philosophy, general sciences,

and society as well as numerical subjects.

A student in her senior year in business administration at USFQ told me how important

it was for her to learn more from liberal education. She stated:

107

107

I like to learn subjects such as music, sculpture, arts, philosophy,

psychology that helps you understand people; well, anything that you

like. Those courses do not have anything to do with my major, but I

enjoy them.

Repeatedly, a university authority at USFQ stated that curricula and academic programs

need to change the current orientation of programs that are offered at many Ecuadorian

universities. He explained to me how the current and common Napoleonic Model has

been affecting the quality of programs in Latin American countries. In his words:

Curricula and programs need the non-formal educational component; it

should be the Renaissance component, and it has to be a Leonardo D‘

Vinci. The sticking point in Latin American universities is the

continuation of the Napoleonic Model. The educational system needs to

change from its basis—elementary education—by the time you get to the

university it is too late. Latin America has not contributed to humanity as

it should –considering all the information that is available in the world.

The guilty one of this situation, it could be said, is the Cold War and the

Communist Party trying to dominate Latin America by convincing young

students and young professors. The two villains are Fidel Castro and

Che Guevara. Their purpose was fulfilled, but they destroyed the youth

through its professors. We must replace this mass of people in order to

become more productive.

A Dean at USFQ was a proponent of liberal education, and he explained to me his

educational experiences at United States universities. In addition, he presented good

arguments for changing the Latin American university model:

I am able to compare and contrast my educational and professional

background. Getting a Ph.D. degree at one of the finest United States

universities has positively affected my professional development because

I have become a professor with more versatility and I am able to adapt to

new environments. Students in the United States universities can develop

108

108

their majors within a well-planned structure. Universities in the United

States, at the undergraduate level, offer students a variety of courses that

prepare them with general education, global vision, and adaptability to

changes. At the graduate level, students receive a more specialized

education, and they become competitive professionals whereas in Latin

American universities, students cannot develop their careers on a long-

term basis due to several challenges. To illustrate, in Latin America

professors do not share all their knowledge with students because they

fear students‘ competency.

As for the fourth action, educational leaders told me that universities need to promote

institutional self-evaluation in order to maintain a continuous quality improvement

process and to be accountable to society. University authorities and society were

promoting institutional self-evaluation and accreditation to advance continuous quality

improvement. Interviewees mentioned the urgent need to advance evaluation and

accreditation in universities in developing countries, particularly in Ecuador.

Interviewees said that universities must promote both institutional evaluation and

program evaluation. They started by focusing first on continuous evaluation—

summative and formative assessments—and quality improvement. In analyzing the

interview transcripts, it became clear to me that the university authorities were using

evaluation for different purposes. They said that evaluation should be an integral part of

the teaching-learning process. It should be a planned, continuous activity. It should

reflect the intended outcomes of curricula and programs. It should assist teachers in

meeting individual needs and providing appropriate programs for students, and it should

use assessment techniques for formative, diagnostic, and summative purposes. A

business professor at PUCE said, ―Our dean is looking for quality certification;

therefore, we are committed to a continuous improvement process. We all—faculty,

administrators, and students—are part of an evaluation process.‖

However, some business students contested the evaluation results by stating, ―Although

some of our professors have not received good evaluation results, they are still teaching.

We are expecting decision making because we, students, would like to be listened to.‖

109

109

A Dean at USFQ, on the other hand, claimed that evaluation does not need to be a very

strict process:

We do not have a formal evaluation at this campus; however, we can see the

quality of our programs through our alumni. When they are hired, we

communicate with employers and receive very favourable information about our

professionals‘ performance.

Positive Outcomes

Since faculty, administrators, students, employers, and community leaders joined

together to develop strategic plan that envisioned the development of a continuous

improvement process, most of the Latin American interviewees and one of the

Ecuadorian student leaders stated that when students are invited to participate in the

institutional strategic plan, they created a shared vision and become more strategic

thinkers; in addition, they became more skilled to develop strategic plans in their job

settings. A business student at PUCE added:

The results of the institutional strategic plan have been used to improve

the quality of our professors. The human resources department

developed a workshop to improve the human attitude of our professors

toward students. A famous motivator and writer from Mexico

Quateqmoc Sanchez led the workshop. Students were also invited;

however, the tickets were too costly for us.

Because university authorities, faculty, and administrators at fine, private universities in

developing countries were inviting leaders to identify new paradigms related to

university educational leadership, students understood the importance of keeping

academia separated from political issues; they rejected politicking activism on campus;

and they became critical thinkers able to contribute with solutions to problems that

challenge developing countries. A high administrator at USFQ emphasized, ―Our

alumni are entrepreneurs, creative people; they are contributing with solutions to the

problems that Ecuador is facing. They are demonstrating integrity and endurance to

confront corruption.‖

110

110

In the same tone, a university authority at USFQ stated:

Our students have become successful people without dogmatisms. They

have rejected politicking activism on campus because they have valued

education overall, they have been like sponges rather than empty glasses

waiting to be filled.

As for the third outcome, an alumnus at USFQ told me how new university programs

have influenced him to improve his level of understanding diversity as well as the

appreciation for his own culture. In his words, ―Since I studied within programs that

included liberal arts education and subjects related to international cultures, I became

more familiar with other cultures; I learned from those cultures; and I valued more my

own culture.‖

Similarly, a biology professor at USFQ stated that students who have learned from other

cultures acquired social consciousness. They developed more sensitivity to diversity and

cultural differences.

As for the fourth positive outcome, since faculty, administrators, and students

participated in the evaluation process, students felt more confident, more competitive,

and more proud to belong to their universities. Alumni and students from both

campuses expressed their sense of belonging to their universities because of public

recognition of the academic prestige at both universities. A student from the biology

school at PUCE told me:

Evaluations of the program have demonstrated that besides becoming good

biology professionals, we have become more competitive; we have received

more job opportunities, and we have received more funds to develop our

projects because people see us as qualified professionals.

One of the employers that participated in this study confirmed the quality of alumni by

saying, ―I have had a good experience with a young professional from USFQ; she has

111

111

leadership skills and a high level of self-confidence; however, she needs to ground her

practice in more science.‖

In contrast, an employer that has hired professionals from PUCE assured:

From my own experience, the professionals that I have hired from PUCE are

very strong in science, and they are well devoted to their jobs; nonetheless, they

need more leadership skills to succeed in their jobs.

One of the Latin American interviewees from Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana,

Colombia affirmed, ―Since I studied in a university with high-quality standards, I

developed more critical analysis that can be demonstrated when developing professional

projects.‖

2. Interdisciplinary Problem-Base-Research Teams

―The learning process does not mean only learning the What of existing knowledge, but

learning the How for as yet undiscovered knowledge‖ (Pelikan, 1992, p. 93). Faculty

and administrators as well as university leaders, alumni, students, employers in

developing countries, particularly in Ecuador, agreed that more research must be

introduced in all programs.

Actions

University authorities, higher education leaders, faculty, administrators, alumni,

students, and employers were joining together to establish teams of researchers. In so

doing, the rector at PUCE acknowledged:

We have an excellent team of researchers at the biology school whose

research has been published in The Golden Book. More than one

hundred new species discovered by research professors such as Cesar

Paz y Miño—a well know researcher in human genetics—and Patricio

Ponce have been published.

112

112

A Director at CONESUP, told me about the actions that the Ecuadorian Higher

Education Council is taking in order to improve research in academic programs:

Ecuadorian universities ought to introduce more research into their programs not

only for promoting quality curricula but also for advancing science, technology

and the culture of the country. Ecuadorian universities should organize a high-

quality team of researchers. In doing so, the idea of Ph.D. programs in Ecuador

must be sustained by a team of research professors with Ph.D.s earned at

prestigious universities. Then, universities should organize a team of research-

oriented students that could work with a team of research professors. They

should further peer-research cooperation with well known international research

universities to develop quality programs with academic recognition based

essentially on the research component. Then, Ecuadorian universities could

achieve social recognition to secure more economic support from organizations

that allocate monetary resources for research projects.

In order to have interdisciplinary problem-based research teams, universities needed to

prepare more researchers and hire professors able to combine research with teaching. As

a high administrator at USFQ, stated:

We hire professors that combine teaching with research activities; by

doing so, we have elevated the level of faculty and, consequently, we

have pushed the Ecuadorian higher education system to improve its level

by looking at our good example based on innovation and high-quality

standards.

A Director at the Ecuadorian Higher Education Council (CONESUP) told me how

CONESUP is promoting a team of researchers formed by highly qualified professors

that devote their time to research activities. In his words:

We at CONESUP are very interested in promoting high-quality

professors, who are full-time and committed to researching and teaching

activities because that is how knowledge can advance. All efforts should

113

113

be done not only to achieve high-quality programs, but also to develop

more research projects and to ensure technological and scientific

advancement.

Positive Outcomes

Since university authorities were improving the research level at all universities,

students were becoming researchers with skills to contribute to the advancement of

science, technology, and society. One alumnus among Latin American leaders

participating in this study, who attended Universidad Católica de Guayaquil, Ecuador,

explained:

I had the opportunity to have professors that devoted their time to

research from whom I have learned to be a more critical thinker. I have

become more research-oriented, and I have acquired team-work skills.

All those positive outcomes have contributed to my development and

growth in terms of quality.

Students and alumni from biotechnology school at USFQ and biology school at PUCE

agreed that their professors were participating in several research projects and they

invited students to work with them. In so doing, they were developing research skills.

Two biology professors at PUCE told me about the research stations that their

university had in order to promote more research activities among faculty and students.

They said:

(Professor 1): For research purposes in the biology field, PUCE has the scientific

stations such as Yazuní and Cuyaveno. Only qualified researchers can enter

those areas. Every research project has its economic control, and the profits are

re-invested in students who are developing research projects.

114

114

(Professor 2): The great advantage of Yazuní and Cuyaveno is that students and

professors doing research have the opportunity to develop their research projects

and theses in reserved areas of Ecuador.

3. Solid Connections between Society and the University

During the interview process, I learned that solid connections between society and the

university are important for the advancement of the science, technology, and society.

Actions

Interviewees told me that actions took two forms. First, faculty, administrators,

students, employers, and alumni introduced social work, community service, cultural

activities, and multicultural education into all programs. And second, faculty, students,

and administrators worked in university extension programs in order to contribute to the

advancement and progress of their communities.

Educational leaders introduced social work and community service into all programs.

University authorities, faculty, and administrators at USFQ said that they attracted full-

time committed professors to their programs, professors who were committed to

teaching, learning, and tutoring, and who were willing to develop strong connections

between society and the university. Therefore, they hired professors with professional

experience in the non-university work place who brought their own experiences to

academia.

Faculty, students, and administrators worked in university extension programs within

their communities. A high administrator at USFQ stated, ―We provide community

service and extension programs in the form of medical care and dental services. A team

of professors and students deliver these services as an important component of their

academic programs.‖

Interviewees from Latin American countries participating in this study agreed:

115

115

We believe that education is a major force for improvement in society,

and we aim to deliver university education at the highest possible

standard to all those who desire it and who are capable of study at the

appropriate level; therefore, we must promote more university extension

programs.

Faculty and administrators who promoted extension programs felt that the benefits were

for the community and for faculty as well. The Dean of the Business School at PUCE

affirmed, ―This school has acquired higher hourly wages for professors participating in

extension programs; they receive $20 per hour and that has helped professors to raise

their income.‖

Positive Outcomes

Since university authorities promoted university extension programs and community

service, students acquired cultural versatility, social consciousness, more appreciation

for their own cultural backgrounds, and improved levels of self-esteem. In addition,

they developed more sensitivity to diversity and cultural differences. A student from the

business school at PUCE stated, ―Having worked for my community, I have learned

how to solve real problems facing my community.‖

One of the biology professors at PUCE told me that students who engage in community

service always come back to their own towns to contribute to the advancement of their

communities. In his words, ―When students have the opportunity to serve their own

communities through community service or university extension, they come back to

serve their communities with their knowledge.‖

A Dean at USFQ affirmed, ―Since our students have participated in university extension

programs and community service, I have seen their growth as persons and as

professionals; they have also grown intellectually.‖

Conclusion and Recommendations

116

116

A very significant attribute of high-quality universities that resulted from this study was

university-wide educational leadership, which included actions such as effective

leadership practices, interdisciplinary problem-based research teams, and a solid

connection between society and the university.

The following are the recommendations that university authorities need to practice:

Engage in effective leadership practices. Politicians do not like to engage in

effective leadership practices; rather, they like to confuse students,

administrators, faculty, and society by promoting old ideas and models, such as

the Napoleonic Model and the old Cordoba Principles. Politicians want to keep

their power inside campuses; therefore, they devote their time to political

campaigns rather than real academic engagement. Many of them are mediocre

people who want to assure their power and jobs at any cost. How can

universities in Latin American countries avoid those politicking practices? Time

passes quickly, and the past and present actions are judging our universities. We

are paying a high price for not introducing high-quality attributes in Latin

American and in Ecuadorian universities.

Develop strategic plans with shared participation by university authorities,

faculty, administrators, students, alumni, employers, and the learning

community in general. Several universities do not invite faculty or students to

contribute in developing strategic plans. Other universities do not even have

strategic plans. How will university leaders envision a better future without

strategic plans?

Enhance community services, social work, and university extension. The

Ecuadorian Higher Education Law establishes all of these actions. To this end,

university authorities need more information and training in order to pursue

these actions. Community services, social work, and university extension will

give faculty, administrators, students, and communities a better sense of social

responsibility and social sensibility because social development must be a

responsibility shared by all parties.

Introduce an effective quality assessment based on ―best practices‖ principles.

Haworth and Conrad‘s (1997: 167 – 168) evaluation principles could effectively

guide the evaluation process. These principles are:

117

117

o The Linking Pin: A Constant Commitment to Student Learning

o People Make Quality Happen: Inclusive and Engagement

o Learning Never Ends: Continuous Program Improvement

o Thinking Multidimensionally: Multiple Methods of Assessment

Determine good teaching and learning evaluation practices. Amacher and

Meiners (2004: 49 – 50) say that student evaluations are useful and could be

used more effectively, but student evaluations are not the end all. Students know

a lazy professor when they see one, but they often cannot discriminate between a

knowledgeable professor and one with little substance but more personality.

―Style is nice, but substance is more important in higher education.‖47

To assess program improvement, Amacher and Meiners (2004) suggest the use

of benchmarks to measure quality enhancement or cost effectiveness.

Continuous improvement and benchmarking ―require radical changes in policies

and practices which the bureaucracy, the employees‘ union, and Congress would

all fiercely resist.‖

Most of the evaluation results have shown that Latin American universities, and

in particular Ecuadorian universities, must improve quality and effectiveness.

Latin American universities need to shift from the Napoleonic Model. The

Napoleonic Model has introduced bureaucratic structures where faculty spend

their time on politicking more and teaching less; there are few program

innovations; due to free admission, there is no test to enter colleges and no

tuition; all these actions have resulted in mass student enrollment with lack of

quality. In addition, several Latin American universities, including Ecuadorian

universities, face serious economic problems that jeopardize the quality of

higher education. There is an urgent call for change and improvement if Latin

American universities want to be competitive. There are very good higher

education patterns; therefore, for what are Latin American universities,

particularly Ecuadorian universities, waiting?

Rethink the Napoleonic Model and its bureaucratic structures. Amacher and

Meiners (2004: 59) state that the economic theory of bureaucracy explains that

bureaucrats have incentives to generate the largest possible budgets because the

political reward is larger for larger volume. ―That is, giant universities have

47

Seymour, 1992.

118

118

larger political constituents who carry more clout in the legislature.‖ According

to Orzechowski‘s (1977) empirical study, public universities ―employ roughly

40% more labor than the private colleges for the same size capital stock.‖

Universities in developing countries, particularly in Ecuador, should accept the

fact that changes and improvements can occur in universities as they occur in

business organizations. Therefore, the solution is clear. Universities must change

bureaucratic structures by creating networks similar to those of smaller

companies. Harvard Business School professor Rosabeth Kanter (1996) stated:

Large organizations must tear down the confining vertical structures that

shape bureauspace—skyscrapers, towers, silos, walls, and tunnel vision.

They must behave like networks of smaller companies, liberating people

to think like entrepreneurs but connecting them to share knowledge and

to form a fluid array of project teams, within the company and with

partners.

Bibliography

Albornoz, O. (1991). Autonomy and Accountability in Higher Education. Prospects 21:

204-213.

Albornoz, O. (1993). Education and Society in Latin America. London: MacMillan

Aldrine, D. (1996). Accountability of Engineering Education: A Basis for Implementing

ABET Engineering Criteria. Operations Engineering Accreditation Commission.

Retrieved November 5, 2004, from

http://www.eng.auburn.edu/center/twc/papers_mda/ABET/ABET.html

Amacher, R., et al. (2004). Faculty towers: Tenure and the structure of higher

education. Oakland, CA: The Independent Institute.

Amaury, N., & Cabrera, A. (1993). The construct validity of institutional commitment:

A confirmation factor analysis. Research in Higher Education, 34 (2) 243-257.

http://www.eng.auburn.edu/center/twc/papers_mda/ABET/ABET.html

119

119

Angell, A., & Graham, C. (1995). Can social reform make adjustment sustainable and

equitable? Lessons from Chile and Venezuela. Journal of Latin American Studies

27 (Part 1).

Apps, J.W. (1988). Higher education in a learning society: Meeting new demands for

education and training. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers.

Arellano, E. (Eds.). (1994). Una nueva universidad para una nueva sociedad:

Alternativas frente a las propuestas oficiales. [A university for a new society:

Alternatives to the official proposals]. In Universidad, Estado y Sociedad. Quito,

Ecuador: Corporación Editora Nacional.

Arellano, R. (2003). Proposal for Latin American concept. Paper presented at the Latin

American Council of Management School – CLADEA. Lima, Peru. Retrieved

January 23, 2005, from

http://www.cladea.org/cladea_ing/pensamiento_latinoamericano.htm

Arthur, J., & Shapiro, A. (1995). Campus wars: Multiculturalism and the politics of

difference. Boulder, CO: Westview.

Attributes of Program Quality in Australia. Retrieved October 20, 2004, from

http://www.detya.gov.au/archive/highered/pubs/quality/overview.htm

Ayala, E. (Eds.). (1994). Partidos políticos y universidad. [Political parties and the

university]. In Universidad, Estado y Sociedad. [Universtiy, State, & Society].

Quito, Ecuador: Corporación Editora Nacional.

Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. M. (Eds.). (1995).

Connected teaching. In Revisioning Curriculum in Higher Education, 469-478.

Bensimon, E. (1995). Total quality management in the academy: A rebellious reading.

Havard Educational Review, 65 (4) 593-611.

http://www.detya.gov.au/archive/highered/pubs/quality/overview.htm

120

120

Berk, R., & Rossi, P. (1990). Thinking about program evaluation. Newbury Park, CA:

SAGE Publications.

Biggs, J. (1989). Does learning about learning help teachers with teaching? Psychology

and the tertiary teacher. The Gazette. 26 (Suppl. 1). Hong Kong: University of

Hong Kong.

Biggs, J. (1999). Teaching for quality learning at university. Buckingham, Great

Britain: Edmundsbury Press.

Bird, C. (1931). Effective study habits. MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Birnbaum, R. & Deshotels, J. (1999). Has the academy adopted TQM ? Planning for

Higher Education. 28(1), 29-37.

Boatringht, K. (1995). University of Wisconsin‘s System Accountability. New

Directions for Higher Education. 91, 51-64.

Bocock, J. & Watson, D. (1994). Managing the university curriculum: Making common

cause. Great Britain: Edmundsbury Press.

Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. (1992). Qualitative research for education: an introduction to

theory and methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Borden, V., & Trudy B. (Eds.). (1994). Using Performance indicators to Guild Strategic

Decision Making. New Directions for Institutional Research. 82. San Francisco:

Jossey Bass.

Borkowski, F., & MacManus, S. (1989). Visions for the future: Creating new

institutional relationships among academia, business, government, and

community. Florida: Board of Regents of the State of Florida.

Bowden, J. & Marton, F. (1998). The University of Learning - beyond quality and

competence in higher education. London: Kogan Page.

121

121

Boyer, E. (1987). College: Undergraduate experience in America. New York: Harper

and Row.

Brigham, S. (1993). TQM: Lessons we can learn from industry. Change. 25(3), 42-48.

Broder, J., & Dorfman, J. (1994). Determinants of teaching quality: what´s important to

students? Research in Higher Education. 35(2), 235-246.

Brubacher, J. (1982). On the philosophy of higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-

Bass.

Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. (1977). Missions of the college

curriculum. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Carvajal, I. (1996) Criterios e indicadores para los procesos de evaluación de la

calidad de las instituciones de educación superior. [Criteria & indicators for

higher education quality evaluation]. Quito, Ecuador: CONUEP.

Chalkley, B. (2000). Geography teaching in higher education: quality, assessment

and accountability. Journal of Geography in Higher Education. 24(2), 238-245

Retrieved September 15, 2004, from

http://www.chelt.ac.uk/el/philg/gdn/hawaii/quality.htm

CONESUP. Informe de actividades 2003 – 2004. [Report 2003 – 2004]. [Brochure].

Quito, Ecuador.

Conrad, C. (1978). The undergraduate curriculum: A guide to innovation and reform.

Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Conrad, C. (1982). Grounded theory: An alternative approach to research in higher

education. Review of Higher Education. 5(4), 259-269.

http://www.chelt.ac.uk/el/philg/gdn/hawaii/quality.htm

122

122

Conrad, C. (2001). Ideas of the University: past, present, and future. University of

Wisconsin – Madison.

Conrad, C., Haworth, J., & Millar, S. (1993). A silent success-master’s education in the

United States. Baltimore, MA: Johns Hopkins Press.

Conrad, C., & Pratt, A. (1983). Making decisions about the curriculum: From metaphor

to model. Journal of Higher Education. 54(1), 16-30.

Conrad, C., & Wilson, R. (1985). Academic program review: Institutional approaches,

expectations, and controversies. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No 5.

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, cannons, and

evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology. 13(1), 3-21.

Cornesky, R., & McCool, S. (1992). Total quality improvement guide for institutions of

higher education. Madison, WI: Magna Publications, Inc.

Craft, A. (1991). Quality assurance in higher education. International conference in

Hong Kong.

Dahllof, U. (Eds.). (1991). Towards a new model for the evaluation of teaching. In

Dahllof, U., et al. Discussions of Education in Higher Education. London: Jessica

Kingsley.

Damrosch, D. (1995). We scholars: Changing the culture of the university. Cambridge,

MA: Harvard University Press.

Dart, B., & Boulton, G. (Eds.). (1998). Teaching and learning in higher education:

From theory to practice. Victoria, Australia: Acer Press.

Diamond, R. (1998). Designing & assessing courses & curricula: A practical guide.

San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

123

123

Duderstadt, J. (2000). A university for the 21st century. Ann Arbor, MI: University of

Michigan Press.

Eddy, J., & Murphy, S. (2000). International higher education systems. Boston:

University Press.

Ellect, C., et al. (1996). Looking backwards with the personnel evaluation standards: An

analysis of the development and implementation of a statewide teacher assessment

program. Studies in Educational Evaluation. 22, 79-109.

Flippo, R., & Caverly, D. (2000). Handbook of college reading and study strategy

research. New Jersey, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Franco, R. (1995). Estado y políticas sociales: Nuevas tendencias en América Latina.

[The state & social policies: New tendencies in Latin America]. Santiago, Chile:

CEPAL.

Fraser, B. (1998). Ecuador‘s new president gives academics hope for a brighter future.

The Chronicle of Higher Education. 1998, 51-52.

Ford, P., et al. (1996). Managing change in higher education: A learning environment

architecture. Buckingham, Great Britain: Open University Press.

Gaither, G., Nedwek, B., & Neal, J. (1994). Measuring up: The promises and pitfalls of

performance indicators in higher education. Washington, DC: Jonathan D. File.

Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for

qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co.

Glesne, C., & Peshkin, A. (1992). Becoming qualitative researchers. White Plains, New

York: Longman.

124

124

Graig, C. (2000). A grounded theory of the attributes of a caring pedagogy that

contribute to student learning. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin –

Madison, 2000).

Hausmann, R. (1994). Sustaining Reform: What role for social policy? In Colin I.,

(Eds.). Redefining the state in Latin America. Paris: OECD. 173-193.

Haworth, J., & Conrad, C. (1995). Curricular transformations: Traditional and emerging

voices in the academy. In C. F. Conrad, C., & Haworth, J. (Eds.). Revisioning

curriculum in higher education. 191-204. Needham Heights, MA: Simon &

Schuster.

Haworth, J., & Conrad, C. (1997). Emblems of quality in higher education: Developing

and sustaining high-quality programs. Boston: Allen & Bacon.

Heiber, D. (1996). Defining and building academic self-concept. (Doctoral dissertation

proposal, University of Wisconsin – Madison, 1996).

Hirschman, A. (1970). Exit, voice, and loyalty. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University

Press.

Huba, M., & Freed, J. (2000). Learner-centered assessment on college campuses:

Shifting the focus from teaching to learning. Boston: Allen & Bacon.

Hurtado, O. (1992). Crisis y reforma de la Universidad Ecuatoriana. [Crisis & reform

of the Ecuadorian University]. Quito, Ecuador: Fundación Ecuatoriana de

Estudios Sociales.

Inter-American Development Bank. (1994). A la Búsqueda del Siglo XXI: Nuevos

caminos de desarrollo en Costa Rica. [Searching for 21st. Century: New

developmental venues in Costa Rica]. Group. Washington, DC, Pilot Mission

Report of the Social Agenda.

125

125

Inter-American Development Bank. (1995). Ex-Post Evaluation on Social Fund.

El Salvador, Evaluation Office. Washington, DC.

Jameson, K. (1997). Higher Education in a Vacuum: Stress and Reform in Ecuador.

Paper presented at the Latin American Studies Association Meetings, Guadalajara,

Mexico. Retrieved September 4, 2004, from

http://136.142.158.105/LASA97/jameson.pdf

Jameson, K. (1997). Social vs. economic reform: Higher education in Ecuador. Paper

presented at the Latin American Studies Association Meetings, Guadalajara,

Mexico.

Jaramillo, M., et al. (Eds.). (2003). Universidad-verdad. [University – Truth]. Revista

de la Universidad del Azuay. 30 (May 2003). Cuenca, Ecuador: Gráficas

Hernández. Retrieved November 21, 2004, from

http://www.uazuay.edu.ec/publicaciones/revista30.pdf

Jensen, J. (1998). Developing a grounded theory of best practices of university legal

services from the faculty-client perspective. (Doctoral dissertation proposal,

University of Wisconsin – Madison, 1998).

Judd, C., Smith, E., & Kidder, L. (1991). Research methods in social relations. Fort

Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.

Kandel, I. (2001). Comparative education and the underdeveloped countries: A new

dimension, Comparative Education Review, 4, 130-35. Retrieved October 17,

2004, from

http://www.ibe.unesco.org/International/Publications/Thinkers/ThinkersPdf/kande

le.pdf

Kells, H. (1995). Self-study processes: A guide to self-evaluation in higher education.

Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press.

http://136.142.158.105/LASA97/jameson.pdf

http://www.ibe.unesco.org/International/Publications/Thinkers/ThinkersPdf/kandele.pdf

http://www.ibe.unesco.org/International/Publications/Thinkers/ThinkersPdf/kandele.pdf

126

126

Laine, M. (2000). Fieldwork, participation and practice: Ethics and dilemmas in

qualitative research. London: SAGE Publications Inc.

Lee, E., & Browen, F. (1975). Managing multicampus systems: effective administration

in an unsteady state. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc., Publishers.

Márquez, G. (1995). Venezuela: Poverty and social policies in the 1980‘s. In N. Lustig

(Eds.), Coping with austerity: Poverty and inequality in Latin America.

Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

Marquis, C. (1994). Evaluación y acreditación universitaria. [University evaluation and

accreditation]. Quito, Ecuador: CONUEP.

Miller, H., & Terry. (1983). Leadership in higher education. Westport, CO: Greenwood

Press.

Moodie, G. (1986). Standards and criteria in higher education. London: Srhe & Nfer-

Nelson.

Morgan, J. (1999). Developing high-quality 'general education' learning outcomes.

Baccalaureate Graduate International Journal. Retrieved from

http://www.llanes.panam.edu/journal/library/Vol1No4/morgan.html

Morsey, Z., & Altbach, P. (1996). Higher education in an international perspective:

Critical issues. Geneva, Switzerland: Garland Publishing, Inc.

Mustan, T. (1996). A research proposal on the validation of the engagement theory.

(Doctoral dissertation proposal, University of Wisconsin – Madison, 1996).

Ortega & Gasset, J. (1946). Mission of university. London: Trubner.

Palmer, P. (1993). To know as we are known. New York: Harper Collins.

Pelikan, J. (1992). The idea of the university. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

http://www.llanes.panam.edu/journal/library/Vol1No4/morgan.html

127

127

Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador. [Pontifical Catholic University of

Ecuador]. [Brochure]. (2002). Ecuador.

Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. (2001). Washington,

DC: APA.

Rodriguez, N. (1993). Universidad y desarrollo. [University and development]. Quito,

Ecuador: Fundación Hernán Malo.

Rojas, C., et al. (1994). El factor humano en las universidades y escuelas politécnicas.

[The human factor in universities & polytechnic schools]. Quito, Ecuador:

CONUEP.

Roldós, L. (2002). Autonomía universitaria. [University autonomy]. Retrieved from

http://www.eroj.org/cotopaxi/EnMarcha1151agosto2002.html

Schwartman, S. (1991). Latin America: Higher education in a lost decade. Prospects 21,

363-373. Retrieved from

http://www.schwartman.org.br/simon/prospects.htm#_1_1

Schwartman, S. (1993). Policies for higher education in Latin America: The context.

HigherEducation, 25: 9-23. Retrieved from

http://www.schwartzman.org.br/simon/higherd.htm

Seymour, D. (1992). Causing quality in higher education. New York: Macmillan

Publishing Company.

Shapiro, N., & Levine, J. (1999). Creating learning communities. San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Simmons, H. (1996). Report on review of the Ecuadorian National Council for Higher

Education: Project for the development of an evaluation and accreditation

process for Ecuadorian universities and polytechnic schools. USIA, Washington,

DC –USIA, Quito, Ecuador.

http://www.schwartzman.org.br/simon/higherd.htm

128

128

Srikanthan, G., & Dalrymple, J. (2002). Developing a holistic model for quality in

higher education. Retrieved from

http://www.cmqr.rmit.edu.au/publications/gsjdicit02.pdf

Stecher, B., & Kirby, S. (2004). Organizational improvement and accountability:

Lessons for education from other sectors. Santa Mónica, CA: RAND.

Strauss, A. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. New York: Cambridge

University Press.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory

procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1997). Grounded theory in practice. Newbury Park, CA:

SAGE Publications, Inc.

Tierney, B.(1998). Responsive University: Restructuring for High Performance.

Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Tierney, W. (1994). Organizational culture and interpretive strategy: Implications for

Latin American higher education. Revista [Journal] IGLU, 85-100.

Tunnermann, C. (1996). A New Vision of Higher Education. Higher Education Policy

9(1), 11-27.

Twombly, S. (1995). Accreditation and evaluation in Ecuadorian higher education:

Obstacles and opportunities. Fulbright Commission, Quito, Ecuador.

Twombly, S., & Urigüen, M. (1996, October 30). Desperately seeking quality in

Ecuadorian higher education: What is it and how should it be measured? Paper

presented at the International Pre-conference of the Association for the Study of

129

129

Higher Education. Retrieved from http://www.higher-

ed.org/international/1996.htm

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (1997).

Higher education in Latin America and the Caribbean in its economic, political

and social context. ESALC/UNESCO.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (1997).

United Nations General Assembly Resolution. Retrieved from

http://www.unesco.org/education/efa/ed_for_all/background/un_resolution_1997.s

html

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (2001,

June 15). The values/attitudinal dimension in quality education. Paper read at the

International Forum on Quality Education, Beijing, People‘s Republic of China.

Retrieved from

http://www.unescobkk.org/ips/ebooks/documents/apnieve2/APNIEVECh5value.p

df

Universidad San Francisco de Quito. [Brochure]. (2002). Ecuador.

Urigüen, M. (1997). Development of an institutional self-evaluation process for the

Ecuadorian higher education system: A comparative perspective. (Master‘s

project, University of Kansas, 1997).

Valdés, H. (1995). Concepciones teóricas acerca de un sistema para evaluar la calidad

de la educación en la enseñanza primaria. (Conceptualization about an evaluation

system for elementary school). (Thesis for Master‘s program in Havana, Cuba,

1995).

Wilber, C., & Kenneth P. (1992). Albert O. Hirschman. In New horizons in economic

thought: Appraisals of leading economists, (Eds.). London: Edward Edgar.

http://www.unesco.org/education/efa/ed_for_all/background/un_resolution_1997.shtml

http://www.unesco.org/education/efa/ed_for_all/background/un_resolution_1997.shtml

http://www.unescobkk.org/ips/ebooks/documents/apnieve2/APNIEVECh5value.pdf

http://www.unescobkk.org/ips/ebooks/documents/apnieve2/APNIEVECh5value.pdf

130

130

World Bank. (1999 - 2000). World development report 1999/2000: Entering the 21st

century. Washington, DC: The World Bank. Retrieved from

http://www.worldbank.org/wdr/2000/

World Bank. (2000). Task Force on Higher Education and Society. (2000). Higher

education in developing countries: Peril and promise. Washington, DC: Author.

131

131

APPENDIX A

The focus of my dissertation is defining the attributes of high-quality programs;

however, part of the data resulting from the interview process belonged to attributes of

high-quality universities.

During the interview process, interviewees exceeded the guiding questions of

my thesis (What program attributes in universities in developing countries contribute to

positive learning outcomes for students?) because they were concerned about higher

education quality according to a holistic approach. Thus, I am introducing Appendix A

in order to inform the readers about the attributes of high-quality universities resulting

from the data I gathered.

In order to organize data around high-quality universities, I followed Haworth

and Conrad‘s (1997) Theory of High-Quality Programs. I used the ―constant

comparative method.‖ As I did with my theory, data were coded and categorized by

clusters. To meet this end, I identified one cluster ―University-Wide Educational

Leadership,‖ and three attributes: effective leadership practices, interdisciplinary

problem-based-research teams, and solid connections between society and the

university.

This topic remains open for further studies, advancement, and testing of high-

quality universities in developing countries. Below is Table 6 with the new cluster of

attributes of high-quality universities in developing countries.

132

132

Table 6

Attributes of High-Quality Universities

In Developing Countries

Cluster One

University Wide Educational Leadership


Effective Leadership

Practices


faculty, administrators, and

students practice strategic

quality management and

strategic planning in their

universities.


faculty, and administrators

invite leaders to identify new

paradigms related to university

educational leadership.

University authorities join

together to define the

orientation of university

programs with more liberal arts

components.

University authorities and

society promote institutional

self-evaluation and

accreditation for continuous

quality improvement.

Students create shared vision and

become more strategic thinkers. They

become able to develop strategic plans

at their jobs.

Students understand the

importance to keep academia separated

from political issues; they reject

politicking activism on campus; and

they become critical thinkers able to

contribute with solutions to problems

that challenge developing countries

Students and alumni acquire social

consciousness, more appreciation for

their own cultural backgrounds, and

improved self-esteem. They develop

more sensitivity to diversity and

cultural differences.

When students trust the quality of

their universities, they improve their

self-confidence and professional skills.

Interdisciplinary

Problem-Based Research

Teams


educational leaders, faculty,

administrators, alumni,

Students become researchers with

skills to contribute to the advancement

of science, technology, and society.

133

133

students, and employers join

together to establish teams of

researchers.

Solid Connections

between Society and the

University

Educational leaders,

faculty and administrators

introduce social work and

community service into all

programs.

Faculty, students and

administrators work in

university extension programs

within their communities.

Students acquire cultural

versatility, social consciousness, more



esteem.

Students learn how to contribute to

improving the quality life in their

communities.

Cluster One: University Wide Educational Leadership

Universities in developing countries, particularly in Ecuador, need to improve

this attribute of high-quality universities. This attribute included effective leadership

practices, interdisciplinary problem-based research teams, and solid connections

between society and the university.

4. Effective Leadership Practices

Educational leaders have a historical role in their society because every higher

educational institution should guide the advancement and progress of the country.

Actions

University authorities, faculty, administrators, and students joined together in

developing four actions. First, university authorities, faculty, administrators, and

students practiced strategic quality management and strategic planning in their

universities. Second, university authorities, faculty, and administrators invited leaders to

identify new paradigms related to university educational leadership. Third, university

authorities joined to define the orientation of university programs. Fourth, university

authorities and society promoted institutional self-evaluation and accreditation for

continuous quality improvement. These actions helped university authorities, faculty,

and administrators to identify cause-effect relationships of challenges that characterize

university leadership practices.

134

134

As for the first action, university authorities, faculty, administrators, and

students told me that they should participate in strategic quality leadership. One

alumnus from the business school at PUCE added:

When I was a student, I felt that we were not involved in actions such as

university planning to promote a high-quality university. Generally, few

university authorities, administrators, and professors took actions. It

would have been better if we had had the opportunity to take actions for

improving the quality of education.

As for the second action, university leaders told me that in order to guarantee an

effective leadership, they ought to adapt to changes. A biology student at PUCE said:

Many university authorities used to demonstrate resistance to change;

however, when USFQ created its biotechnology school, PUCE was

pressed by the competition and started to change and become more

competitive. Now that my school has projects and contracts with

international organizations and the state, we see a positive change.

People here at PUCE used to wait for the money to come.

In the same vein, a university authority at USFQ told me that an effective leadership

practice must promote new paradigms. In his words:

We are inviting leaders of the country to identify new paradigms related

to university educational leadership. This is not a traditional university;

this is a university patterned after the United States model; a model

based on liberal arts and general education. We want to stop the

instruction paradigm. In so doing, we need quality components such as

highly qualified faculty. Faculty who share this philosophical

background, faculty with humanistic education, and only those

professors who have experienced their education in those systems—

liberal art education—holding undergraduate and graduate degrees from

United States universities—professors highly qualified with Ph.D.

135

135

degrees and who have lived the concept of liberal arts—can contribute to

quality programs.

Faculty and administrators at new universities in Latin America, particularly in

Ecuador, questioned the Napoleonic model. They were promoting more current,

prestigious, and more successful educational models that included changes and

innovations in academic programs and curricula. One of the interviewees from El

Salvador, who is an alumnus from the business field said:

Our universities in developing countries need to disconnect from the Napoleonic

Model and incorporate interdisciplinary education with more general education and

liberal arts into all programs. Interdisciplinary education should introduce philosophy,

sociology, psychology, and economics. As a business administrator, I believe that

general education helped me to develop a more social consciousness based on a

theoretical framework. I am able to understand much better the context in which our

countries are acting. The most important part of my college education was the

connection between integral education—general education—with professional

education. That was a good program because I have become a more integrated

professional.

The president of the National Universities and Polytechnic Schools Federation

(FENAUPE) stated:

Currently, we, alumni and young professionals, are willing to bring new

ideas related to effective leadership practices into universities in order to

promote highly qualified universities.

Another student leader explained to me his perception of university leadership practices

by saying:

People with good intentions and good wishes are always present on

campuses. Nevertheless, goals are not reached with good intentions only.

136

136

Universities are the cornerstone for society and vice versa. People

dedicated to politicking and who are uninterested in the advancement of

quality education have increased in our universities and federations.

Also, there are authorities with good intentions; nonetheless, those

authorities do not have the ability to start international agreements and

alliances. Hence, many efforts have been frustrated.

As for the third action, interviewees told me that Latin American and Ecuadorian

universities need to introduce more liberal arts education. A university authority at

USFQ explained the benefits of liberal arts education as part of interdisciplinary

programs:

At USFQ, every undergraduate student has to learn subjects related to

liberal arts education. Students need to contrast and compare a

pyramidal-knowledge system rather than a cylindrical-knowledge

system; therefore, curricula have to reflect interdisciplinary program

characteristics through liberal arts education and other subjects related to

each profession. Students, during their college life, experience liberal

arts education through Socratic Seminars, philosophy, general sciences,

and society as well as numerical subjects.

A student in her senior year in business administration at USFQ told me how important

it was for her to learn more from liberal education. She stated:

I like to learn subjects such as music, sculpture, arts, philosophy,

psychology that helps you understand people; well, anything that you

like. Those courses do not have anything to do with my major, but I

enjoy them.

Repeatedly, a university authority at USFQ stated that curricula and academic programs

need to change the current orientation of programs that are offered at many Ecuadorian

universities. He explained to me how the current and common Napoleonic Model has

been affecting the quality of programs in Latin American countries. In his words:

137

137

Curricula and programs need the non-formal educational component; it

should be the Renaissance component, and it has to be a Leonardo D‘

Vinci. The sticking point in Latin American universities is the

continuation of the Napoleonic Model. The educational system needs to

change from its basis—elementary education—by the time you get to the

university it is too late. Latin America has not contributed to humanity as

it should –considering all the information that is available in the world.

The guilty one of this situation, it could be said, is the Cold War and the

Communist Party trying to dominate Latin America by convincing young

students and young professors. The two villains are Fidel Castro and

Che Guevara. Their purpose was fulfilled, but they destroyed the youth

through its professors. We must replace this mass of people in order to

become more productive.

A Dean at USFQ was a proponent of liberal education, and he explained to me his

educational experiences at United States universities. In addition, he presented good

arguments for changing the Latin American university model:

I am able to compare and contrast my educational and professional

background. Getting a Ph.D. degree at one of the finest United States

universities has positively affected my professional development because

I have become a professor with more versatility and I am able to adapt to

new environments. Students in the United States universities can develop

their majors within a well-planned structure. Universities in the United

States, at the undergraduate level, offer students a variety of courses that

prepare them with general education, global vision, and adaptability to

changes. At the graduate level, students receive a more specialized

education, and they become competitive professionals whereas in Latin

American universities, students cannot develop their careers on a long-

term basis due to several challenges. To illustrate, in Latin America

138

138

professors do not share all their knowledge with students because they

fear students‘ competency.

As for the fourth action, educational leaders told me that universities need to promote

institutional self-evaluation in order to maintain a continuous quality improvement

process and to be accountable to society. University authorities and society were

promoting institutional self-evaluation and accreditation to advance continuous quality

improvement. Interviewees mentioned the urgent need to advance evaluation and

accreditation in universities in developing countries, particularly in Ecuador.

Interviewees said that universities must promote both institutional evaluation and

program evaluation. They started by focusing first on continuous evaluation—

summative and formative assessments—and quality improvement. In analyzing the

interview transcripts, it became clear to me that the university authorities were using

evaluation for different purposes. They said that evaluation should be an integral part of

the teaching-learning process. It should be a planned, continuous activity. It should

reflect the intended outcomes of curricula and programs. It should assist teachers in

meeting individual needs and providing appropriate programs for students, and it should

use assessment techniques for formative, diagnostic, and summative purposes. A

business professor at PUCE said, ―Our dean is looking for quality certification;

therefore, we are committed to a continuous improvement process. We all—faculty,

administrators, and students—are part of an evaluation process.‖

However, some business students contested the evaluation results by stating,

―Although some of our professors have not received good evaluation results, they are

still teaching. We are expecting decision making because we, students, would like to be

listened to.‖

A Dean at USFQ, on the other hand, claimed that evaluation does not need to be

a very strict process:

We do not have a formal evaluation at this campus; however, we can see the

quality of our programs through our alumni. When they are hired, we

communicate with employers and receive very favorable information about our

professionals‘ performance.

139

139

Positive Outcomes

Since faculty, administrators, students, employers, and community leaders

joined together to develop strategic plan that envisioned the development of a

continuous improvement process, most of the Latin American interviewees and one of

the Ecuadorian student leaders stated that when students are invited to participate in the

institutional strategic plan, they created a shared vision and become more strategic

thinkers; in addition, they became more skilled to develop strategic plans in their job

settings. A business student at PUCE added:

The results of the institutional strategic plan have been used to improve

the quality of our professors. The human resources department

developed a workshop to improve the human attitude of our professors

toward students. A famous motivator and writer from Mexico

Quateqmoc Sanchez led the workshop. Students were also invited;

however, the tickets were too costly for us.

Because university authorities, faculty, and administrators at fine, private universities in

developing countries were inviting leaders to identify new paradigms related to

university educational leadership, students understood the importance of keeping

academia separated from political issues; they rejected politicking activism on campus;

and they became critical thinkers able to contribute with solutions to problems that

challenge developing countries. A high administrator at USFQ emphasized, ―Our

alumni are entrepreneurs, creative people; they are contributing with solutions to the

problems that Ecuador is facing. They are demonstrating integrity and endurance to

confront corruption.‖

In the same tone, a university authority at USFQ stated:

Our students have become successful people without dogmatisms. They

have rejected politicking activism on campus because they have valued

education overall, they have been like sponges rather than empty glasses

waiting to be filled.

As for the third outcome, an alumnus at USFQ told me how new university programs

have influenced him to improve his level of understanding diversity as well as the

140

140

appreciation for his own culture. In his words, ―Since I studied within programs that

included liberal arts education and subjects related to international cultures, I became

more familiar with other cultures; I learned from those cultures; and I valued more my

own culture.‖

Similarly, a biology professor at USFQ stated that students who have learned

from other cultures acquired social consciousness. They developed more sensitivity to

diversity and cultural differences.

As for the fourth positive outcome, since faculty, administrators, and students

participated in the evaluation process, students felt more confident, more competitive,

and more proud to belong to their universities. Alumni and students from both

campuses expressed their sense of belonging to their universities because of public

recognition of the academic prestige at both universities. A student from the biology

school at PUCE told me:

Evaluations of the program have demonstrated that besides becoming good

biology professionals, we have become more competitive; we have received

more job opportunities, and we have received more funds to develop our

projects because people see us as qualified professionals.

One of the employers that participated in this study confirmed the quality of alumni by

saying, ―I have had a good experience with a young professional from USFQ; she has

leadership skills and a high level of self-confidence; however, she needs to ground her

practice in more science.‖

In contrast, an employer that has hired professionals from PUCE assured:

From my own experience, the professionals that I have hired from PUCE are

very strong in science, and they are well devoted to their jobs; nonetheless, they

need more leadership skills to succeed in their jobs.

One of the Latin American interviewees from Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana,

Colombia affirmed, ―Since I studied in a university with high-quality standards, I

developed more critical analysis that can be demonstrated when developing professional

projects.‖

141

141

5. Interdisciplinary Problem-Base-Research Teams

―The learning process does not mean only learning the What of existing

knowledge, but learning the How for as yet undiscovered knowledge‖ (Pelikan, 1992, p.

93). Faculty and administrators as well as university leaders, alumni, students,

employers in developing countries, particularly in Ecuador, agreed that more research

must be introduced in all programs.

Actions

University authorities, higher education leaders, faculty, administrators, alumni,

students, and employers were joining together to establish teams of researchers. In so

doing, the rector at PUCE acknowledged:

We have an excellent team of researchers at the biology school whose

research has been published in The Golden Book. More than one

hundred new species discovered by research professors such as Cesar

Paz y Miño—a well know researcher in human genetics—and Patricio

Ponce have been published.

A Director at CONESUP, told me about the actions that the Ecuadorian Higher

Education Council is taking in order to improve research in academic programs:

Ecuadorian universities ought to introduce more research into their programs not

only for promoting quality curricula but also for advancing science, technology

and the culture of the country. Ecuadorian universities should organize a high-

quality team of researchers. In doing so, the idea of Ph.D. programs in Ecuador

must be sustained by a team of research professors with Ph.D.s earned at

prestigious universities. Then, universities should organize a team of research-

oriented students that could work with a team of research professors. They

should further peer-research cooperation with well known international research

universities to develop quality programs with academic recognition based

essentially on the research component. Then, Ecuadorian universities could

achieve social recognition to secure more economic support from organizations

that allocate monetary resources for research projects.

142

142

In order to have interdisciplinary problem-based research teams, universities needed to

prepare more researchers and hire professors able to combine research with teaching. As

a high administrator at USFQ, stated:

We hire professors that combine teaching with research activities; by

doing so, we have elevated the level of faculty and, consequently, we

have pushed the Ecuadorian higher education system to improve its level

by looking at our good example based on innovation and high-quality

standards.

A Director at the Ecuadorian Higher Education Council (CONESUP) told me how

CONESUP is promoting a team of researchers formed by highly qualified professors

that devote their time to research activities. In his words:

We at CONESUP are very interested in promoting high-quality

professors, who are full-time and committed to researching and teaching

activities because that is how knowledge can advance. All efforts should

be done not only to achieve high-quality programs, but also to develop

more research projects and to ensure technological and scientific

advancement.

Positive Outcomes

Since university authorities were improving the research level at all universities,

students were becoming researchers with skills to contribute to the advancement of

science, technology, and society. One alumnus among Latin American leaders

participating in this study, who attended Universidad Católica de Guayaquil, Ecuador,

explained:

I had the opportunity to have professors that devoted their time to

research from whom I have learned to be a more critical thinker. I have

become more research-oriented, and I have acquired team-work skills.

All those positive outcomes have contributed to my development and

growth in terms of quality.

143

143

Students and alumni from biotechnology school at USFQ and biology school at PUCE

agreed that their professors were participating in several research projects and they

invited students to work with them. In so doing, they were developing research skills.

Two biology professors at PUCE told me about the research stations that their

university had in order to promote more research activities among faculty and students.

They said:

(Professor 1): For research purposes in the biology field, PUCE has the scientific

stations such as Yazuní and Cuyaveno. Only qualified researchers can enter

those areas. Every research project has its economic control, and the profits are

re-invested in students who are developing research projects.

(Professor 2): The great advantage of Yazuní and Cuyaveno is that students and

professors doing research have the opportunity to develop their research projects

and theses in reserved areas of Ecuador.

6. Solid Connections between Society and the University

During the interview process, I learned that solid connections between society

and the university are important for the advancement of the science, technology, and

society.

Actions

Interviewees told me that actions took two forms. First, faculty, administrators,

students, employers, and alumni introduced social work, community service, cultural

activities, and multicultural education into all programs. And second, faculty, students,

and administrators worked in university extension programs in order to contribute to the

advancement and progress of their communities.

Educational leaders introduced social work and community service into all

programs. University authorities, faculty, and administrators at USFQ said that they

attracted full-time committed professors to their programs, professors who were

committed to teaching, learning, and tutoring, and who were willing to develop strong

connections between society and the university. Therefore, they hired professors with

professional experience in the non-university work place who brought their own

experiences to academia.

144

144

Faculty, students, and administrators worked in university extension programs

within their communities. A high administrator at USFQ stated, ―We provide

community service and extension programs in the form of medical care and dental

services. A team of professors and students deliver these services as an important

component of their academic programs.‖

Interviewees from Latin American countries participating in this study

agreed:

We believe that education is a major force for improvement in society,

and we aim to deliver university education at the highest possible

standard to all those who desire it and who are capable of study at the

appropriate level; therefore, we must promote more university extension

programs.

Faculty and administrators who promoted extension programs felt that the benefits were

for the community and for faculty as well. The Dean of the Business School at PUCE

affirmed, ―This school has acquired higher hourly wages for professors participating in

extension programs; they receive $20 per hour and that has helped professors to raise

their income.‖

Positive Outcomes

Since university authorities promoted university extension programs and

community service, students acquired cultural versatility, social consciousness, more

appreciation for their own cultural backgrounds, and improved levels of self-esteem. In

addition, they developed more sensitivity to diversity and cultural differences. A student

from the business school at PUCE stated, ―Having worked for my community, I have

learned how to solve real problems facing my community.‖

One of the biology professors at PUCE told me that students who engage in

community service always come back to their own towns to contribute to the

advancement of their communities. In his words, ―When students have the opportunity

to serve their own communities through community service or university extension,

they come back to serve their communities with their knowledge.‖

A Dean at USFQ affirmed, ―Since our students have participated in university

extension programs and community service, I have seen their growth as persons and as

professionals; they have also grown intellectually.‖

145

145

Conclusion and Recommendations

A very significant attribute of high-quality universities that resulted from this

study was university-wide educational leadership, which included actions such as

effective leadership practices, interdisciplinary problem-based research teams, and a

solid connection between society and the university.

The following are the recommendations that university authorities need to

practice:

Engage in effective leadership practices. Politicians do not like to engage in

effective leadership practices; rather, they like to confuse students,

administrators, faculty, and society by promoting old ideas and models, such as

the Napoleonic Model and the old Cordoba Principles. Politicians want to keep

their power inside campuses; therefore, they devote their time to political

campaigns rather than real academic engagement. Many of them are mediocre

people who want to assure their power and jobs at any cost. How can

universities in Latin American countries avoid those politicking practices? Time

passes quickly, and the past and present actions are judging our universities. We

are paying a high price for not introducing high-quality attributes in Latin

American and in Ecuadorian universities.

Develop strategic plans with shared participation by university authorities,

faculty, administrators, students, alumni, employers, and the learning

community in general. Several universities do not invite faculty or students to

contribute in developing strategic plans. Other universities do not even have

strategic plans. How will university leaders envision a better future without

strategic plans?

Enhance community services, social work, and university extension. The

Ecuadorian Higher Education Law establishes all of these actions. To this end,

university authorities need more information and training in order to pursue

these actions. Community services, social work, and university extension will

give faculty, administrators, students, and communities a better sense of social

responsibility and social sensibility because social development must be a

responsibility shared by all parties.

Introduce an effective quality assessment based on ―best practices‖ principles.

Haworth and Conrad‘s (1997: 167 – 168) evaluation principles could effectively

guide the evaluation process. These principles are:

146

146

o The Linking Pin: A Constant Commitment to Student Learning

o People Make Quality Happen: Inclusive and Engagement

o Learning Never Ends: Continuous Program Improvement

o Thinking Multidimensionally: Multiple Methods of Assessment

Determine good teaching and learning evaluation practices. Amacher and

Meiners (2004: 49 – 50) say that student evaluations are useful and could be

used more effectively, but student evaluations are not the end all. Students know

a lazy professor when they see one, but they often cannot discriminate between a

knowledgeable professor and one with little substance but more personality.

―Style is nice, but substance is more important in higher education.‖48

To assess program improvement, Amacher and Meiners (2004) suggest the use

of benchmarks to measure quality enhancement or cost effectiveness.

Continuous improvement and benchmarking ―require radical changes in policies

and practices which the bureaucracy, the employees‘ union, and Congress would

all fiercely resist.‖

Most of the evaluation results have shown that Latin American universities, and

in particular Ecuadorian universities, must improve quality and effectiveness.

Latin American universities need to shift from the Napoleonic Model. The

Napoleonic Model has introduced bureaucratic structures where faculty spend

their time on politicking more and teaching less; there are few program

innovations; due to free admission, there is no test to enter colleges and no

tuition; all these actions have resulted in mass student enrollment with lack of

quality. In addition, several Latin American universities, including Ecuadorian

universities, face serious economic problems that jeopardize the quality of

higher education. There is an urgent call for change and improvement if Latin

American universities want to be competitive. There are very good higher

education patterns; therefore, for what are Latin American universities,

particularly Ecuadorian universities, waiting?

Rethink the Napoleonic Model and its bureaucratic structures. Amacher and

Meiners (2004: 59) state that the economic theory of bureaucracy explains that

bureaucrats have incentives to generate the largest possible budgets because the

political reward is larger for larger volume. ―That is, giant universities have

48

Seymour, 1992.

147

147

larger political constituents who carry more clout in the legislature.‖ According

to Orzechowski‘s (1977) empirical study, public universities ―employ roughly

40% more labor than the private colleges for the same size capital stock.‖

Universities in developing countries, particularly in Ecuador, should accept the

fact that changes and improvements can occur in universities as they occur in

business organizations. Therefore, the solution is clear. Universities must change

bureaucratic structures by creating networks similar to those of smaller

companies. Harvard Business School professor Rosabeth Kanter (1996) stated:

Large organizations must tear down the confining vertical structures that

shape bureauspace—skyscrapers, towers, silos, walls, and tunnel vision.

They must behave like networks of smaller companies, liberating people

to think like entrepreneurs but connecting them to share knowledge and

to form a fluid array of project teams, within the company and with

partners.

mónica urigüen tesis completa

Education

learning integrative

studentshighquality

alquality programs

ethicsselection of programs

quality education

learning real

learning requirements1

conrads theory