DOCSLIB.ORG

Student Engagement and Value Co- Creation: a Model of University and Student Impacts on the Quality of Educational Outcomes

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Student Engagement and Value Co- Creation: a Model of University and Student Impacts on the Quality of Educational Outcomes Student engagement and value co- creation: a model of university and student impacts on the quality of educational outcomes Anne Harbisher PhD 2017 Student engagement and value co- creation: a model of university and student impacts on the quality of educational outcomes Anne Harbisher A Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the Manchester Metropolitan University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy September 2017 School of Business: Manchester Metropolitan University Acknowledgements I would like to give my heartfelt thanks to Professor Gill Wright at MMU for her advice, guidance and challenge she has given me over the years of this study. I would also like to thank Dr Sai Nudurupati at MMU for his guidance on the research and introducing me to the joys of AMOS. Thank you to the staff at Staffordshire University who have helped me with the setting up the survey and finally to my husband Andy and daughters Maddie and Izzy for keeping normality in my life during this research. Abstract Student engagement is a phrase that is now common in the vocabulary of academics and higher education managers but there is little clarity about what it actually means and how this can be encouraged and harnessed. The theories around student engagement have emerged from the educational discipline and have been quite isolationist. This study integrates these theories with those of value co-creation to give a different and additional perspective that has a valuable contribution to theory and practice. The study uses the UK Engagement Survey from the Higher Education Academy as a basis for developing a model of student engagement. Undergraduate students at a university were surveyed using the amended UKES instrument and a sample size of 891 was obtained. The survey instrument included qualitative open comments that were analysed alongside the quantitative data. SPSS was used to generate descriptive and comparative statistics and exploratory factor analysis, which was further, developed using AMOS into confirmatory factor analysis to specify a model of student engagement. The additional items used from the value co-creation literature significantly enhanced the final model outcomes. The study has made important contributions to the areas of method, in its use of the amended survey incorporating qualitative aspects, of theory in the integration of theories from different academic disciplines and of practice, in the development of a useable model that had implications for use in universities. Contents List of Tables ................................................................................................................. 1 List of Figures ............................................................................................................... 3 1 Chapter One - Introduction .................................................................................. 4 1.1 Aims, Objectives and Scope .......................................................................... 6 1.2 Significance of the Study ............................................................................... 7 1.3 Higher Education and Quality – an Introduction .......................................... 8 1.3.1 Higher Education Quality Infrastructure in the UK ................................ 9 1.3.2 Student Engagement ............................................................................ 12 1.4 Methodological approach ........................................................................... 13 1.5 Overview of research findings ..................................................................... 15 1.6 Thesis Outline .............................................................................................. 15 2 Chapter Two - Structure and Development of UK Higher Education ................ 17 2.1 Structure of Higher Education in UK ........................................................... 18 2.1.1 What are Universities? ......................................................................... 18 2.1.2 University Groups ................................................................................. 21 2.1.3 Sector Support and Governance Organisations ................................... 23 2.2 University Sector Development .................................................................. 24 2.2.1 Student Finance ................................................................................... 31 2.2.2 Marketisation of Higher Education ...................................................... 35 2.3 The Student Market .................................................................................... 39 2.3.1 Full time Students ................................................................................ 40 2.3.2 Part Time Students ............................................................................... 42 2.4 University Strategic Directions .................................................................... 44 2.4.1 Competition and internationalisation .................................................. 45 2.4.2 Teaching and Satisfaction .................................................................... 46 2.5 Performance Indicators, League Tables and Guides ................................... 49 2.6 Development of Quality Assurance in Higher Education ............................ 53 2.7 Higher Education and Research Bill 2017.................................................... 56 2.7.1 Teaching Excellence Framework .......................................................... 59 3 Characteristics of University Education, Relationships and Roles. .................... 62 3.1 University Service Characteristics ............................................................... 63 3.1.1 Intangibility .......................................................................................... 64 3.1.2 Inseparability ........................................................................................ 65 3.1.3 Variability ............................................................................................. 66 3.1.4 Perishability and Trialability ................................................................. 67 3.2 The University Service Encounter ............................................................... 67 3.3 The Importance of University Employees ................................................... 69 3.4 Co-Production, Value Co-Creation - Marketing Perspectives ..................... 72 3.5 Co-Production, Value Co-Creation - Education Perspectives ...................... 82 3.6 Relationships and Roles in Universities ....................................................... 85 3.7 Students as Customers ................................................................................ 89 3.8 University Student Consumer Behaviour .................................................... 96 3.8.1 Modelling University Consumer Decision Making ............................... 99 3.8.2 Extended Experience Behaviour Model ............................................. 109 3.9 Chapter Conclusions .................................................................................. 110 4 Quality and Student Engagement .................................................................... 112 4.1 Concepts of Quality in Higher Education .................................................. 113 4.2 Service Quality in the Marketing Discipline .............................................. 115 4.3 Dimensions of Quality in the Education Discipline ................................... 118 4.3.1 Input variables .................................................................................... 121 4.3.2 Process variables ................................................................................ 122 4.3.3 Output variables ................................................................................. 123 4.3.4 Teaching variables affecting learning gains ....................................... 124 4.3.5 The importance of education learning gain ....................................... 124 4.4 Academic Constructs and Definitions of Student Engagement ................ 125 4.5 Sectorial Constructs and Definitions of Student Engagement .................. 138 4.5.1 Higher Education Academy ................................................................ 138 4.5.2 HEFCE and SFC .................................................................................... 142 4.5.3 Quality Assurance Agency .................................................................. 143 4.5.4 The Student Engagement Partnership ............................................... 145 4.5.5 GuildHE and Student Engagement ..................................................... 146 4.6 Institutional Initiatives in Engagement ..................................................... 148 4.7 Student Surveys Linked to Engagement and Quality ................................ 151 4.8 Student Experience Surveys ...................................................................... 152 4.9 National Student Survey ............................................................................ 153 4.9.1 NSS Design and Methodology ............................................................ 156 4.9.2 Use of NSS .......................................................................................... 157 4.10 National Surveys of Student Engagement ................................................. 159 4.11 United Kingdom Engagement Survey ........................................................ 162
Load more

Recommended publications
  • NSS Review Phase One Report
    NSS review Phase one report Reference OfS 2021.05 Enquiries to [email protected] Publication date 30 March 2021 Contents Executive summary ...................................................................................................................... 2 Evidence and findings ..................................................................................................................... 3 Recommendations .......................................................................................................................... 6 Background ................................................................................................................................... 7 Governance and funding ................................................................................................................. 8 Concerns about the NSS .............................................................................................................. 8 Terms of reference ........................................................................................................................ 9 Working group .............................................................................................................................. 9 Methodology ............................................................................................................................... 10 Analysis: NSS and degree outcomes ........................................................................................ 19 Discussion of each of the terms
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Student Satisfaction Data in Quality Assurance and Enhancement: How Providers Use Data to Improve the Student Experience
    The Role of Student Satisfaction Data in Quality Assurance and Enhancement: How Providers Use Data to Improve the Student Experience Subscriber Research Series 2015-16 Dr Joanna Williams and George Mindano University of Kent Subscriber Research Series 2015-16 In 2014-15, following a call for expressions of interest open to its subscribers, QAA commissioned six small-scale primary research projects intended to encourage collaboration between providers and promote the formation of communities of practice. This report is one of two on the topic of the role of student satisfaction data in quality assurance and enhancement. It was submitted to QAA by the University of Kent, and written by Dr Joanna Williams and George Mindano. The reports are not QAA documents, so we have respected the authors' approach in terms of style and presentation. We hope that you will read them with interest. Other topics in the series are the transition experiences of entrants to higher education from increasingly diverse prior educational experiences; and an impact study of the guidance documents for higher education providers published by QAA in 2013. For more information, and to read other reports in the series, visit www.qaa.ac.uk/improving-higher-education/research Contents 1 Background ................................................................................................................ 1 2 Methodology .............................................................................................................. 1 2.1 Analytical framework ...................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • National Student Survey
    National Student Survey Analysis of national results for 2011 Alex Buckley August 2012 Contents Key findings ______________________________________________________________ 3 1. How to use this report ___________________________________________________ 5 1.1 Statistical significance _________________________________________________ 6 2. Overall results _________________________________________________________ 8 2.1 Overall item scores __________________________________________________ 8 2.2 Overall scale scores _________________________________________________ 10 2.3 Relationships between aspects of the student experience ______________________ 11 2.4 Impact of aspects of the student experience on overall satisfaction _______________ 12 3. Student characteristics __________________________________________________ 13 3.1 Differences between age groups ________________________________________ 13 3.2 Differences between genders __________________________________________ 16 3.3 Differences between disability and no known disability ________________________ 18 3.4 Differences between subject clusters ____________________________________ 20 3.5 Differences between student domicile ____________________________________ 23 3.6 Differences between part-time and full-time students _________________________ 25 3.7 Differences between part-time Open University students and other part-time students 27 4. Institutional characteristics _______________________________________________ 29 4.1 Differences between UK nations________________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2020 Generating Philanthropic Support for Higher Education
    CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2020 Generating Philanthropic Support for Higher Education Findings from data collected for 2016–17, 2017–18 and 2018–19 © 2020 Council for Advancement and Support of Education Original publication date: 13 May 2020 All rights reserved. No part of the material protected by this copyright may be reproduced or used in any form, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without written permission from the Council for Advancement and Support of Education. Limit of Liability/Disclaimer: While the publisher has used its best efforts in preparing this document, it makes no representations or warranties in respect to the accuracy or completeness of its contents. No liability or responsibility of any kind (to extent permitted by law), including responsibility for negligence is accepted by the Council for Advancement and Support of Education, its servants, or agents. All information gathered is believed correct at publication date. Neither the publisher nor the author is engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional services. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought. CASE-ROSS EDITORIAL BOARD The Editorial Board members helped manage the project by contributing their time and expertise at each stage of developing this report. They were involved with survey review, script creation, survey promotion, data collection, data verification,
    [Show full text]
  • The Accountability of Higher Education Institutional Leaders
    The accountability of Higher Education Institutional Leaders Steven Quigley Doctor in Education programme (Ed.D) University College London 1 Abstract This thesis addresses the research question ‘What are the accountability responsibilities and obligations for higher education institutional leaders? In this process, three tensions were identified for those leaders: first, the balancing of accountability responsibilities and obligations in the decision-making process; second, how stakeholders affect the balance between obligations and responsibilities; and third, how decisions based upon the balance between obligations and responsibilities have been affected by different stakeholders which then affect the stakeholders in turn. It was argued from evidence provided by twelve institutional leaders from eight institutions that policy changes affecting institutional funding and financial maintenance can lead institutional leaders, in response to both policy drivers and their accountability, to take institutional action through their agency that can lead to challenges to the academic identity of the staff working in their institutions. A theoretical framework drawing upon theories related to structure and agency was used as a lens to understand responses to questions relating to managerialism, new managerialism, new public management, accountability and academic identity. Halstead’s models of Accountability were used to analyse several reasons for accountability that were identified through this research. Those reasons for accountability were
    [Show full text]
  • Student Satisfaction, League Tables and University Applications: Evidence from Britain
    Stephen Gibbons, Eric Neumayer, Richard Perkins Student satisfaction, league tables and university applications: evidence from Britain Article (Accepted version) (Refereed) Original citation: Gibbons, Stephen, Neumayer, Eric and Perkins, Richard (2015) Student satisfaction, league tables and university applications: evidence from Britain. Economics of Education Review. ISSN 0272-7757 DOI: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2015.07.002 © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/62875/ Available in LSE Research Online: July 2015 LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LSE Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE Research Online website. This document is the author’s final accepted version of the journal article. There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher’s version if you wish to cite from it. Student satisfaction, league tables and university applications: Evidence from Britain Stephen Gibbons*† Eric Neumayer* Richard Perkins* June 2015 *Department of Geography and Environment, London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) † Spatial Economics Research Centre and Centre for Economic Performance, LSE Abstract We investigate the impact of information about student satisfaction on university choice, using data from the UK’s National Student Survey (NSS) and on applications to undergraduate degrees.
    [Show full text]
  • A CRITICAL PATH Securing the Future of Higher Education in England
    A CRITICAL PATH Securing the Future of Higher Education in England IPPR Commission on the Future of Higher Education 2013 1 IPPR RESEARCH STAFF Nick Pearce is director of IPPR. Rick Muir is associate director for public service reform at IPPR. Jonathan Clifton is a senior research fellow at IPPR. Annika Olsen is a researcher at IPPR. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Commissioners would like to thank Nick Pearce, Rick Muir, Jonathan Clifton and Annika Olsen for their help with researching and writing this report, and London Economics for modelling the higher education funding system. They would also like to thank those organisations and individuals who submitted evidence or agreed to be interviewed as part of this project. In particular, they would like to thank the staff and students who facilitated their learning visits to higher education institutions in Sheffield and Newcastle. They would also like to thank Jon Wilson, along with all those who organised and participated in the joint seminar series with King’s College London, and Marc Stears for his guidance in the early stages of the project. ABOUT IPPR IPPR, the Institute for Public Policy Research, is the UK’s leading progressive thinktank. We are an independent charitable organisation with more than 40 staff members, paid interns and visiting fellows. Our main office is in London, with IPPR North, IPPR’s dedicated thinktank for the North of England, operating out of offices in Newcastle and Manchester. The purpose of our work is to assist all those who want to create a society where every citizen lives a decent and fulfilled life, in reciprocal relationships with the people they care about.
    [Show full text]
  • Knowledge Exchange and Commercialisation: The
    KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE AND COMMERCIALISATION: THE STATE OF THE PROFESSION IN UK HIGHER EDUCATION Knowledge Exchange and Commercialisation: The State of the Profession in Higher Education “Knowledge Exchange and Commercialisation: The state of the profession in UK Higher Education” This report was commissioned by PraxisUnico Contact: [email protected] Authors: Rob Johnson and Mattia Fosci www.researchconsulting.co.uk Contact: [email protected] Report dated: February 2016 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 2 CONTENTS Foreword 5 Executive summary 7 Background and methodology 9 The KEC profession in UK higher education 11 The work of KEC professionals 19 Profiling KEC professionals 25 Improving the effectiveness of the KEC profession 31 Key trends and challenges 37 Appendix 1 43 Appendix 2 44 Appendix 3 46 3 Knowledge Exchange and Commercialisation: The State of the Profession in Higher Education 4 FOREWORD The focus on taking research knowledge into commercial products and services, policy and social interventions is intense. PraxisUnico has represented professionals working at the interface between researchers and external organisations for almost 15 yearsI. During that time we have seen the work of such intermediaries become increasingly recognised and respected. The UK is ranked 4th in the world for university- industry collaboration in R&DII. The government’s ambition is that universities should ‘continue to increase their collaboration with industry to drive At a time of growth research commercialisation’ and increase the ” in the economy income they earn from working with business III and others to £5 billion by 2025 .
    [Show full text]
  • Guildhe Submission to the Independent Review of Funding and Student Finance
    GuildHE submission to the Independent Review of Funding and Student Finance Led by Lord Browne of Madingley Response to First call for evidence GuildHE seeks a sustainable, diverse and dynamic higher education sector ¾ That delivers a well-educated and socially inclusive nation ¾ That enhances the UK’s economic competitiveness ¾ That fosters cultural engagement and knowledge creation ¾ That promotes global understanding and mutual exchange GuildHE Submission to the Through their success at being strong, adaptable and Independent Review of Funding clear sighted, they will be able to continue to add value and Student Finance to the HE ecology as very many have done in the past two centuries. They have historically been active in their concern both for the neglected and the innovative and play a crucial part in responding to the educational challenges in higher education environments. GuildHE members seek to be thoughtfully pragmatic while actively aspiring and planning for the kind of provision we believe UK higher education should achieve – both for the nation itself and as a world class educational provider. We also recognise that within the Review Panel are those highly versed in the detail of Higher Education Introduction from GuildHE Chair and colleagues for whom much will be new territory. Our material is perhaps explaining the obvious for and Chief Executive Officer those in the know but we hope useful for those who know less about issues affecting this part of the HE Dear Lord Browne, sector and its place in the interlocking pattern of the UK academic and professional community. GuildHE, one of the two formal representative bodies for higher education, is pleased to offer you a contribution to your first call for evidence in for the Professor Ruth Farwell, Chair GuildHE Independent Review of Funding and Student Finance that you are leading for Department of Business Miss Alice Hynes, CEO GuildHE Innovation and Skills (DBIS).
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report and Accounts 2019 - 2020
    Annual Report and Accounts 2019 - 2020 PB 1 Our Vision Building on our historical strengths and our reputation for excellence, we will contribute to society in Wales and the wider world by applying our knowledge to local and global challenges. Working within a supportive, welcoming and bilingual community, we will use our expertise to cultivate critical thinking, independent questioning and skills that equip our learners for lives of success. 2 2 3 Contents Our Vision 2 Vice-Chancellor’s introduction 4 Chair of Council’s annual review 6 Education and student experience 8 Research and innovation with impact 10 Contribution to society 12 International engagement 14 Welsh language and culture 16 Corporate governance and internal control 18 Statement of Council responsibilities in respect of the consolidated financial statements 20 University trustees 22 Financial Review 23 Public Benefit Statement 33 Professional advisors 35 Independent auditor’s report to the Council of the Aberystwyth University 36 Consolidated & University statement of comprehensive income 39 Consolidated and University balance sheet 40 Consolidated and University statement of changes in reserves 41 Consolidated cash flow statement 42 Statement of principal accounting policies 43 Notes to the financial statements 51 Images 74 3 2 3 Vice-Chancellor’s introduction The academic year Going forward the University will need to 2019-2020 was diversify its funding streams as well as both a successful identify further collaborations. and challenging year for the University. Capital projects have continued broadly on Significant progress schedule despite the impact of COVID-19 with has been made to some very significant awards and decisions.
    [Show full text]
  • Purpose of Membership
    Association of Managers in Higher Education: Purpose and Principles of Membership THE ASSOCIATION Mission Statement: ‘Promote and encourage outstanding management practice in the Higher Education sector by facilitating cross-disciplinary dialogue and the sharing of expert and professional knowledge’ 1. What is AMHEC? Formed in 1960, AMHEC is a network of managers from the Higher Education sector covering all disciplines that brings together a broad wealth of expertise and experience from across the UK. 2. What are its aims? The Association aims to encourage and support the exchange of information and knowledge about our business and developments in the sector; provide a forum for debate about how we can improve our strategic focus, working practices and services; and offer opportunities to network with sector colleagues. By bringing together a wide range of expertise, we are able to collectively consider the actions HE leaders and managers need to take to respond to the complex and fast-changing world of an expanding sector to ensure we can offer comprehensive, current and competitive provision. 3. What does the Association offer? AMHEC holds an annual conference around Easter which focuses on topics of current interest and includes speakers and delegates from sector organisations such as HEFCE, TDA and UCEA, as well as experts and professionals from outside higher education. We also hold a workshop in October, publish a regular Newsletter and facilitate a series of benchmarking workshops. There is a mail base to enable and encourage networking between members, which is used regularly by members seeking benchmarking information or guidance on particular projects or issues.
    [Show full text]
  • Research and Innovation Briefing
    Research and Innovation Briefing Introduction Celebrating the diversity of Research and innovation are the beating heart of higher education. They the higher education sector ensure the generation of new knowledge on which the UK’s international reputation for excellence rests. Continuous creation and dissemination of this knowledge, as well as the high-level skills that research engenders in Briefing 3: Research and academics, students and public and private sector collaborators, also Innovation underpins current – and future – economic growth. This is a new series of monthly This is the third in a series of briefings highlighting the contribution of a range of institutions that are often not featured in the national spotlight – briefings produced by GuildHE from the highly specialised subject-specific institutions, to smaller looking at different aspects of a institutions with just a few thousand students to larger institutions with a diverse higher education sector. particular focus, whether delivering part-time courses or celebrating their religious roots. February 2015 This briefing focuses on research and innovation in these institutions and the impact this has on society, culture and the economy in the UK and Briefing 2: World-Class beyond. Infrastructure 1. Environment small, specialist and locally facing higher Briefing 1: Student Experience and Engagement The creation of new knowledge that education institutions (HEIs) embedded combines excellence with impact is “the in international research and innovation life-blood of economic growth and societal systems can increase and sustain their 1. Research Councils UK, progress”1. contributions to regional and sectorial http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/RCUK- economic growth. prod/assets/documents/RCUKStra There are centres of excellent research tegicVision.pdf The project demonstrated how these operating within and across all universities 2.
    [Show full text]