Lorena Carrillo

1. Leadership, Culture and Quality Assurance Systems: their Impact in the Technological Universities in Mexico Lorena Carrillo

3. Big picture: HE in the world • Massification • Internationalization • Marketization • Diversification All of it mainly derived from information and communications technological development , globalization trends and the knowledge society era.

4. Aims of the project: The project will examine the performance of the UT’s in Mexico focusing on the influence of three specific aspects: leadership, organisational cultures and quality assurance systems. The aim is to develop ideas for improving efficacy in the implementation of the enhancement quality strategies used in the SUT, and other similar tertiary institutions.

5. ENABLING INPUTS Leadership Org Culture QAS Human Resources School Governance Teaching & Learning Infrastructure Project LEARNERS CHARACTERISTICS EXANI II SES Outcomes Social Benefits EGETSU Alumni working after 6 months SUT Quality of graduate´s outcomes, org processes and services CONTEXT SES / National governance and management strategies / National Standards Public Expectations / Labour market demands / Globalization Based on Framework for understanding education Q. EFA Q Imperative. UNESCO

6. Context: Mexico • 14th biggest in territory • 11th most populated; young • 90th GNIPC, classified as upper middle income class, (WB, 2015) • 74th with HDI = 0.756, classified as high, (UNDP, 2015) • 15th world leading exporting countries: 1st in LA region • Member of OECD, G20 and G5

7. Context: Mexico • “…stagnant productivity and insufficient inclusiveness are the critical causes of persistent poverty, inequality, and regional disparities within Mexico” (WB, 2013) • 1st in poverty of OECD countries, 18.9% • 2nd income inequality in OECD countries, average income of top 10% is 30.5 times higher than bottom 10% • Global competitiveness: 57th • Corruption perception: score 35/100 (TI, 2015) • Rule of Law: 34% percentile rank (WB, 2010)

8. Context: Mexico’s HE sector: • Tertiary education policy in Mexico centres on economic and political development as well as social integration (SEP, 2013) • Expanding coverage with equity • Improving the relevance and Q of the provision • Balance between institutional autonomy and active state presence • In the previous 5 decades, HE sector grew more than 80 times and age related population only by 4 (Tamez Guerra, 2006) • Remarkable achievements in coverage but still behind OECD NOTE: Important educational reform in 2012. Still on implementation stage

9. Rationale: empirical • Importance of HE • Desirable attention to both quantitative and qualitative aspects, in a context of tightened budgets. • Different strategies • Implementation stage • Efficiency • How Quality is assessed • Impact of assessment • Future

10. International discourses • Leadership as an action and not as a person in charge (A. Harris and Peter Gronn) • Antony Giddens Structuration Theory; agency and structure • McNay´s organisational cultures categories: collegium, bureaucracy, corporation and enterprise • Q assurance models: New public management, ISO, • Accreditation models: Regional/national bodies • Policies in National context and in SUT Rationale: theoretical

11. Quality in HE? • Quality for whom and what? Right, equity and relevance • Specific outcome • Relativist… compared to • Object? • Processes • Outputs • Outcomes

12. Methodological • Majority of studies are quantitative or qualitative but not both • Many single studies of each aspect (separately) Rationale

13. Research Questions: • How do high performing UT’s in México achieve their results in relation to the quality of graduate’s outcomes, services and internal organisational processes? • In particular, how does the organisational culture prevent or support the achievement of valuable results? • To what extent are the results related to the implemented strategies for quality improvement in the outcomes, the services and processes? • How does the leadership component influence the results?

14. Sequential explanatory mixed method QUANTITATIVE  QUALITATIVE • First Stage: Quantitative analysis Methodology Low SES ClusterAnalysis Someindicators of MECASUT Two Universities; low and high performance Two Universities; low and high performance High SES Correlations and linear regressions MECASUT Identification of performance indicators with significant impact

15. Performance modelled as a basic production model with an output-outcome orientation (Wang, 2010) • 60 out of 109 Universities considered for analysis • Cluster Analysis (Hair et al.,1999) • suitable technique for multivariate statistical analysis • the minimisation of within-group variance and maximisation of between-groups variance on the selected variables • MECASUT database: 36 indicators, from 2008 to 2013 Methodology, first stage:

16. Methodology, first stage: cluster analysis • MECASUT, big number of indicators. Criteria for selection: • Non collinearity among variables • Normal distribution patterns (variability) • Main focus on output and outcome type variables • Context influence: based on indexes issued by INEGI • Socioeconomic Strata. Levels 1 to 7 • Social Gap Index

17. Methodology, first stage: cluster analysis • Variables selected: Processes (to be analysed in detail during second stage) Inputs Outputs Outcomes Completion Rate Indicator 5 Graduates Level of Satisfaction Indicator 7 % of Graduates with a job after 6 months Indicator 6 EGETSU scores Indicator 8 EGETSU vs. EXANI II scores EXANI II scores Indicator 1 (values considered in relation to EGETSU scores)

18. Methodology, first stage: cluster high SES Variables with significant differences

19. Methodology, first stage: cluster low SES Variables with significant differences

20. Methodology, first stage: cluster high SES Variables with non-significant differences

21. Methodology, first stage: selected Universities UT MORELIA UT SELVA UT AGUASCALIENTES UT HUASTECA POTOSINA

22. Sequential explanatory mixed method QUANTITATIVE  QUALITATIVE • First Stage: Quantitative analysis Methodology Cluster Analysis Some indicators of MECASUT Two Universities low and high performance Low SES Two Universities low and high performance High SES Correlations and linear regressions MECASUT Identification of performance indicators with significant impact

23. Methodology, first stage: strongest variables

24. Sequential explanatory mixed method • Second stage: Qualitative analysis focus Methodology Semi- structured interviews Rector Heads of department (management and teaching) Questionnaires Teaching and administrative staff Experience sampling method Rector and 2-3 main figures of authority

25. Methodology, second stage: semi-structured interviews • To whom: rectors and heads of management and teaching dept. • Analysis techniques: • Thematic analysis, for identifying, analysing and reporting themes (Braun & Clarke, 2006) • Discourse analysis, Use of Seven Building Tasks to identify how language enacts social and cultural perspectives and identities (Gee, 2011)

26. Methodology, second stage: supportive quantitative strategies • Surveys through a questionnaire • To whom: teaching and administrative staff • Analysis technique: • Descriptive and inferential statistics ONE TWO • Experience Sampling Method • To whom: Rector and 2-3 main figures of authority • Analysis technique: • Descriptive and inferential statistics

27. Timetable: • April 2016: Ethics approval • May-Jun 2016: data collection • August 2016 – April 2017: data analysis and writing • May – August 2017: revision and proof reading • September 2017 submission of thesis