What Has Happened to Quality?

  • Thomas SzuleviczEmail author
  • Casper Feilberg
Part of the Cultural Psychology of Education book series (CPED, volume 7)


In this chapter, the authors analyze the notion of quality in the quality assurance systems and it discusses how the quality assurance systems have affected universities and students alike. Over the last 20 years, universities around the globe have been subject to comprehensive quality assurance systems and procedures. These quality assurance systems have become a very contested territory. The proponents of the quality agenda argue that the quality assurance systems set a more or less common framework for quality assurance, and that they enable improvement of quality, by supporting mutual trust within and across universities and borders and by providing valuable information on quality for the media and stakeholders. It is also argued that universities act in a changed and increasingly knowledge-based world where higher education plays a crucial role in socioeconomic and cultural development. According to some, these changes call for new regulatory tools such as the quality assurance systems to ensure high standards for research and the relevance of students’ qualifications. On the other side, the quality assurance systems have also received strong criticism. The quality assurance agenda has been fueled by the fact that benchmarking and the production of comparable data globally have become crucial governing tools. And accompanied by other (neoliberal) regulatory tools, the quality assurance systems are accused of having changed academia, and some would even argue that they have threatened the raison d’être of academia by turning universities into manufacturing companies with counterproductive quality standards.


Quality assurance Higher education Neoliberal regulation 


  1. Abrahamsen, A. (2017). Stress og arbejdsvilkår blandt universitetsansatte forskere. København: Tænketanken DEA.Google Scholar
  2. Alves, A. M. (2015). Thinking beyond instrumentality. What if dangerous ideas were the future of academia? In E. Westergaard & J.S. Wiewiura, (Eds.), On the facilitation of the academy (pp. 71–86). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  3. Berg, L. D., Huijbens, E. H., & Larsen, H. G. (2016). Producing anxiety in the neoliberal university. The Canadian Geographer, 60(2), 168–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Busch, L. (2017). Knowledge for sale. The neoliberal takeover of higher education. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Editions Quae.Google Scholar
  5. Craig, R., Amernic, J., & Tourish, D. (2014). Perverse audit culture and accountability of the Modern Public University. Financial Accountability & Management, 30(1), 0267–4424.Google Scholar
  6. Davidovitch, N. (2016). Contemporary challenges of higher education in Israel. In J. Zajda & V. Rust (Eds.), Globalisation and higher education reforms. Springer International Publishing Switzerland.Google Scholar
  7. Filippakou, O., & Tapper, T. (2008). Quality assurance and quality enhancement in higher education: Contested territories? Higher Education Quarterly, 62(1/2), 84–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Furedi, F. (2017). What’s happened to the university? A sociological exploration of its infantilisation. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Gibbs, P. (2015). Happiness and education: Troubling students for their own contentment. Time & Society, 24(1), 54–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gourlay, L. (2017). Student engagement, ‘learnification’ and the sociomaterial: Critical perspectives on higher education policy. Higher Education Policy, 2017(30), 23–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jarvis, D. S. L. (2014). Regulating higher education: Quality assurance and neo-liberal managerialism in higher education—a critical introduction. Policy and Society, 155–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Korsgaard, M. T., & Mortensen, S. S. (2017). Towards a shift in perspective for inclusive education research—a continental approach. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 21(12), 1245–1260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Larsen, S. N. (2015). Top-down universities governance eradicates thinking and good teaching. In E. Westergaard & J. S. Wiewiura (Eds.), On the facilitation of the academy (pp. 87–100). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  14. Long, B. (2010). Losing sight of Humboldt: A synoptic review of Australian government policy over the last 35 years. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 34(3), 451–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lorenz, C. (2012). If you’re so smart, why are you under surveillance? Universities, neoliberalism, and new public management. Critical Inquiry, 38(3), 599–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Moss, P. (2014). Transformative change and real utopias in early childhood education. A story of democracy, experimentation and potentiality. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sahlberg, P. (2011). The fourth way of Finland. Journal of Educational Change, 12(2), 173–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG) (2015). Brussels. Belgium.Google Scholar
  19. Sugarman, J. (2015). Neoliberalism and psychological ethics. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 35(2), 103–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Tanggaard, L. (2018). Creativity in higher education: Apprenticeship as a thinking-model for bringing back more dynamic, teaching and research in a university context. This volume.Google Scholar
  21. Thorley, C. (2017). Not by degrees. Improving the student mental health in the UK’s universities. Institute for Public Policy Research.Google Scholar
  22. Zajda, J. & Rust, V. (2016). Current research trends in globalisation and neo-liberalism in higher education. In J. Zajda & V. Rust (Eds.), Globalisation and higher education reforms. Springer International Publishing Switzerland.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Aalborg UniversityAalborgDenmark

Personalised recommendations