The Australian Educational Researcher

, Volume 33, Issue 1, pp 23–39 | Cite as

Addressing the basics: Academics' view of the purpose of higher education

  • Kim Watty


A number of changes have occurred in the higher education sector under the auspices of quality and quality improvement. Much of this change has resulted in a compliance-driven environment (more measures, more meetings, more form-filling and less time for the core activities of teaching and research). It is an environment that seeks to assure all and sundry of the quality of academic programs. Anecdotally, many academics are not convinced that the current systems do, indeed, assure quality. The reasons for this may be many and varied. One suggestion is that differences in perceptions about the purpose of higher education inevitably lead to differences in the definition of quality itself and consequently, differences in systems designed to assure that quality. Understanding what academics think about the purpose of higher education may provide some clues about how they consider quality should be defined.

In this research, the focus is on the views of academic accountants in Australia, defined as: academics whose main discipline area is accounting and who are involved in accounting education at an Australian university. The findings of this research show that the respondent group do, in fact, view the purpose of higher education currently promoted in their schools/departments differently from the purpose that they consider ought to be promoted. Such fundamental differences have the potential to influence the motivation and effectiveness of staff undertaking core activities in Australian universities. In addition, articulating the views of this important stakeholder group also has the potential to ensure that their views are considered in the discussions around purpose, quality and performance measures in higher education — all of which impact on the working lives of academic accountants in Australian universities.


Critical Reasoning High Education Sector Quality Assurance System Efficient Teaching Academic Accountant 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Barnett, R. (1992a) The idea of quality: voicing the educational,Higher Education Quarterly, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barnett, R. (1992b) Improving Higher Education: Total Quality Care, The Society for Research in Higher Education and Open University Press, Buckingham UK.Google Scholar
  3. Barnett, T. (1988) Entry and exit performance indicators: some policy and research issues,Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 16–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beard, C. A. (1999) The quest for academic power,The Journal of Higher Education, vol. 70, no. 5, pp. 572–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Becher, T. (1987) Disciplinary discourse,Studies in Higher Education, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 261–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Coady, T. (2000) Universities and the ideal of inquiry, in T. Coady, ed., Why Universities Matter, Allen and Unwin, St Leonards NSW.Google Scholar
  7. Coaldrake, P. & L. Stedman (1998)On the Brink: Australia's Universities Confronting their Future, University of Queensland Press, St. Lucia QLD.Google Scholar
  8. Department of Education Science and Training (2002) Higher Education Report for the 2003 to 2005 Triennium, DEST, Canberra.Google Scholar
  9. Gale, T. (2000) Review essay putting academics in their place,Australian Educational Researcher, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 121–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Giertz, B. (2000) The quality concept in higher education, Paper presented at the TQM for Higher Education Institutions II, Verona Italy, 30–31 August.Google Scholar
  11. Giertz, B. (2001) Anything goes? The concept of quality revisited, Paper presented to the Sixth Quality in Higher Education Seminar — The End of Quality?, Birmingham UK, 25–26 May.Google Scholar
  12. Harvey, L. and D. Green (1993) Defining quality,Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 9–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Harvey, L. (1997) Quality is not free! Quality monitoring alone will not improve quality,Tertiary Education and Management, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 133–43.Google Scholar
  14. Heath, P. (2000) Education as citizenship: appropriating a new social space,Higher Education Research and Development, vol.19, no. 1, pp. 43–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Knight, P. T. & P. R. Trowler (2000) Department-level cultures and the improvement of learning and teaching,Studies in Higher Education, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 69–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Marginson, S. (2000) Rethinking academic work in the global era,Journal of Higher Education, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 23–35.Google Scholar
  17. Mclnnes, C. (2000) Changing academic work roles: the everyday realities challenging quality in teaching,Quality in Higher Education, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 143–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. McInnes, C., M. Powles & J. Anwyl (1994) Australian Academics' Perspectives on Quality and Accountability, Centre of Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne, Melbourne.Google Scholar
  19. Mclnnes, C. (1992) Changes in the nature of academic work,Australian Universitie' Review, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 9–12.Google Scholar
  20. Middlehurst, R. (1992) Quality: an organising principle for higher education,Higher Education Quarterly, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 20–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Newton, J. R. (1999) A Longitudinal Participant Observer Study of the Influence of Context on the Development and Implementation of a Quality Assurance System in a College of Higher Education, PhD thesis, University of Wales.Google Scholar
  22. Newton, J. (2001) Views from below: academics coping with quality, Paper presented at the Sixth Quality in Higher Education Seminar — The End of Quality?, Birmingham UK, 25–26 May.Google Scholar
  23. Nixon, J. (1996) Professional identity and the restructuring of higher education,Studies in Higher Education, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 5–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Simsek, H. & K. S. Louis (1994) Organizational change as paradigm shift,Journal of Higher Education, vol. 65, no. 6, pp. 670–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Trowler, P. R. (1998) Academics Responding to Change: New Higher Education Frameworks and Academic Cultures, The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press, Buckingham UK.Google Scholar
  26. Vidovich, L. (1998) Quality as Accountability in Australian Higher Education of the 1990s: A Policy Trajectory, PhD thesis, Murdoch University, Perth.Google Scholar
  27. Wilson, B. (1996) uality in universities, Sir Robert Menzies oration, 4 October 1995,Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 149–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Watty, K. (2003) When will academics learn about quality,Quality in Higher Education, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 213–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Watty, K. (2005) Quality in accounting education: what say the academics?,Quality Assurance in Education, vol. 13, no. 2, pp.120–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Watty, K. (2005) Quality in Accounting Education: An Empirical Analysis of the Views of Academic Accountants, PhD thesis, RMIT University, Melbourne.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Australian Association for Research in Education 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kim Watty
    • 1
  1. 1.RMIT UniversityAustralia

Personalised recommendations