A B C
D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
Citation
reference: Harvey, L., 2004, Analytic Quality Glossary, Quality
Research International, http://www.qualityresearchinternational.com/glossary/
This is a dynamic glossary and
the author would welcome any e-mail suggestions for amendments or
additions.
____________________________________________________________________
Transformation is the process of changing
from one qualitative state to another.
explanatory
context
Transformation as a process of
transmutation from one state to another can apply to an individual or an
organisation or the product or service supplied by the organisation. When
related to higher education, transformation usually refers to the
transformation of the student via learning or the transformation of the institution so that it is better able to provide
transformative outcomes, that is, transformative learning or research.
In South Africa, transformation has a
particular meaning related to the political transformation of society: higher
education having a transformative role in moving from apartheid to an inclusive
society.
Transformation, as a definition of quality, focuses on process: on the enhancement and empowerment of the learner and is linked to, but not
limited to, value
added.
analytical
review
As one of the five broad definitions of
quality, Harvey (1995) states:
Quality
as transformation is a classic notion of quality that sees
it in terms of change from one state to another. In educational terms,
transformation refers to the enhancement and empowerment of students or the
development of new knowledge (see Harvey and Green, (1993)) {see
associated issues below}
Campbell and Rozsnyai (2002, pp. 20Ð21)
also discuss quality as transformation:
Quality as transformation. This concept
focuses firmly on the learners: the better the higher education institution,
the more it achieves the goal of empowering students with specific skills,
knowledge, and attitudes which enable them to live and work in the knowledge
society. This notion of quality may be particularly appropriate when there have
been significant changes in the profile of learners, for example, when changes
in society or politics have enhanced access to higher education for large
numbers of disadvantaged learners. It is argued that the delivery of a
transformational quality approach involves five key elements (Harvey and
Knight, 1996, p. 117):
á
envisioning
quality as a transformational process designed to enhance the experience of
students;
á
a bottom-up
approach to continuous improvement;
á
responsiveness
and openness as the means of gaining greater trust;
á
an emphasis
on effective action;
á
external
monitoring which is sensitive to internal procedures (and values).
While this notion is popular, it may be difficult
to measure quality as transformation in terms of intellectual capital (Lomas,
2002).
In the South African context,
transformation relates to societal change., not just overcoming apartheid but
addressing technological change. As the Green
Paper on Higher Education Transformation (Department of
Education,1996, section 4) proposed:
Transition and Transformation
É. higher education policy in South Africa confronts two sets of challenges
simultaneouslyÉ Successful policy will have to overcome an historically
determined pattern of fragmentation, inequality and inefficiency; it will have
to increase access for black students and for women; and it will have to
generate new models of learning and teaching to accommodate a larger student
populationÉ. Successful policy must restructure the higher education system and
its institutions to meet the needs of an increasingly technologically oriented
economy; and it must deliver the requisite research, the highly trained people
and the useful knowledge to equip a developing society with the capacity to
participate competitively in a rapidly changing global context.
These challenges effectively
define the need to transform higher education in South Africa É. The
transformation of higher education intended by the Ministry is a far-reaching
process. It has three central features:
Increased participation É Greater numbers of students will have to be accommodated, and
these students will be recruited from a broader distribution of social groups
and classes. Such ÔmassificationÕ of South African higher education will
necessarily involve different patterns of teaching and learning, new
curriculums and more varied modes of delivery. In a situation of financial
constraints, planning and negotiations will have to ensure that wider
participation is affordable and sustainable.
Greater responsiveness ÉIn essence, heightened responsiveness and accountability express
the greater impact of the market and civil society on higher education and the
consequent need for appropriate forms of regulation.
Increased cooperation and
partnerships The new system will emphasise
cooperation and partnerships in governance structures and operations of higher
education. The model of cooperative governance, proposed by the NCHE and
endorsed by the Ministry, reconceives the directive role of the state with a
steering and coordinating role. ÉRelations between higher education
institutions will see new partnerships and cooperative ventures among regional
clusters of institutions in order to optimise the use of scarce resources.
For
Harvey and Knight (1996), transformation involved transforming institutions to
enable learner transformation. For many governments and intergovernmental
organisations, higher education has a key role in providing the change agents
for the future. Higher education should provide a transformative experience for
students, so that they can, themselves, take a leading role in transforming
society. Thus, Harvey and Knight argue that higher education must itself be
transformed if it is to be successful as a transformative process. In brief,
such transformation requires the following:
á
shifting
from teaching to learning;
á
developing
explicit skills, attitudes, and abilities as well as knowledge;
á
developing
appropriate assessment procedures;
á
rewarding
transformative teaching;
á
encouraging
discussion of pedagogy;
á
providing
transformative learning for academics;
á
fostering new
collegiality;
á
linking
quality improvement to learning;
á
auditing
improvement.
More recently, Eckel et al.
(1998) defined transformation in relation to higher education as follows:
Transformation (1) alters the culture of
the institution by changing select
underlying assumptions and institutional
behaviors, processes, and
products; (2) is deep and pervasive,
affecting the whole institution; (3) is
intentional; and (4) occurs over time.
In ÔDefining qualityÕ (Harvey & Green, 1993),
quality as transformation is elaborated as follows:
The transformative view of quality is rooted in the
notion of Ôqualitative changeÕ, a fundamental change of form. Ice is
transformed into water and eventually steam if it experiences an increase in
temperature. While the increase in temperature can be measured the
transformation involves a qualitative change. Ice has different qualities to
that of steam or water. Transformation is not restricted to apparent or
physical transformation but also includes cognitive transcendence. This
transformative notion of quality is well established in Western philosophy and
can be found in the discussion of dialectical transformation in the works of
Aristotle, Kant, Hegel and Marx. It is also at the heart of transcendental
philosophies around the world, such as Buddhism and Janism. More recently it
has been entertainingly explored in PirsigÕs (1976) Zen and the Art of Motor
Cycle Maintenance.
This notion of quality as transformative raises issues about the relevance of a product-centred notion of quality such as fitness-for-purpose. There are problems, as we have seen, in translating product-based notions of quality to the service sector. This becomes particularly acute when applied to education (Elton, 1992). Unlike many other services where the provider is doing something for the consumer, in the education of students the provider is doing something to the consumer. This process of transformation is necessarily a unique, negotiated process in each case. The same reasoning applies to research. The provider does not just produce Ônew knowledgeÕ in a vacuum but is involved in transforming a given body of knowledge for particular purposes. Again, this transformation is not unidirectional, a dialectical process is taking place with a negotiated outcome (Kuhn, 1962, 1970; Price, 1963; Lakatos and Musgrave, 1970; Mullins, 1973; Holton, 1973)
Education
is not a service for a customer but an ongoing process of transformation of the
participant be it student learner or researcher. This leads to two notions of
transformative quality in education, enhancing the
consumer and empowering the
consumer.
related terms
See
also
sources
Campbell, C. & Rozsnyai, C., 2002, Quality
Assurance and the Development of Course Programmes. Papers on
Higher Education Regional University Network on Governance and Management of
Higher Education in South East Europe Bucharest, UNESCO.
Department of Education (South Africa),
1996, Green Paper on Higher Education Transformation December, 1996 (Pretoria, Department of
Education). Available at http://www.polity.org.za/html/govdocs/green_papers/hegreenp.html?rebookmark=1#_Toc374340698
Eckel, P., Hill, B., and
Green, M., 1998, On change, En route to transformation. (Washington, DC, American Council on Education).
Elton, L., 1992, ÔUniversity Teaching: A professional
model for quality and excellenceÕ, paper to the ÔQuality by DegreesÕ Conference
at Aston University, 8th June, 1992.
Harvey, L. and Green, D., 1993, ÔDefining
qualityÕ, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(1).
Harvey, L. and Knight, P., 1996, Transforming
Higher Education (Buckingham, Open University Press and
Society for Research into Higher Education).
Harvey, L., 1995, ÔEditorial: The quality agendaÕ, Quality
in Higher Education,
1(1), pp. 5Ð12.
Holton, G., 1973,
Thematic Origin of Scientific Thought: Kepler to Einstein. Cambridge, Harvard
University Press.
Kuhn, T. S.,
1962, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, University of Chicago
Press.
Kuhn, T. S.,
1970, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. (Second edition, enlarged with
postscript). Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
Lakatos, I. &
Musgrave, A., eds, 1970, Criticisms and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press.
Lomas, L. 2002 ÔDoes the Development of Mass Education
Necessarily Mean the End of Quality?Õ, Quality in Higher Education 8(1).
Mullins, N. C.,
1973, Theory and Theory Groups in Contemporary American Sociology. New York,
Harper and Row.
Pirsig, R. M.,
1976, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An inquiry into values.
London, Corgi.
Price, D. J. de
S., 1963, Little Science, Big Science. New York, Columbia University Press.