Acreditación institucional en Chile bajo la ley N° 20.129repercusión en la mejora de la calidad de las áreas de gestión institucional y docencia de pregrado de la Universidad Finis Terrae (2006 –2016)

Abstract

Objectives 1. To determine the relationship between the institutional certification and the quality improvement of the analyzed aspects in the areas of institutional management and undergraduate teaching of the University Finis Terrae. 2. To describe the effect of the institutional certification process on the self-regulation capacity in the areas of institutional management and undergraduate teaching of the University Finis Terrae. 3. To ascertain the knowledge students have about the implications associated with Universities being certified. Methodology This research belongs to a mixed approach, which implies the combination of both quantitative and qualitative research methods. The approach facilitates the simultaneous achievement of empirical evidence and the understanding of events from the point of view of the parties involved. For statistical alignment two different surveys were developed with two groups of informants. The first group was composed of authorities, employees from the quality guarantee unit and academics. The second group was composed of undergraduate students. To approach the subjective perceptions, 19 in depth and semi-structured interviews were developed, according to a common pattern, to the informants of the first group. The interviewees selection was carried out considering the following aspects: having participated, at least once, in an institutional certification process of the university under consideration, during the period 2006-2016 and having a part-time or full time contract. Conclusions 1. The different processes of institutional certification the university has carried out have had an impact on the quality improvement. The effects, at different levels, have improved the aspects under evaluation in the areas of institutional management and undergraduate teaching. These processes have mainly affected the development, promotion, incorporation and, in some occasions, the deep and permanent application of the continual improvement. 2. The aspects that have reached a lower self-regulation capacity are: the organization of human resources structures, the performance assessment, the selection and recruitment policies, the human resource perfection policies, the policy-making structure, the resources endowment, the tracking of graduates and the educational research development. 3. The aspects that have reached a higher self-regulation capacity are: the institutional strategic planning, the availability of and access to clear and up-to-date data, the curriculum design process and the development of policies to track the learning achievements of students. 4. The results show discrepant data from the in-depth interviews and the surveys, this divergence can derive from two causes: (1) the way the survey had to be answered was not understood or (2) the survey was answered by more people from certified degrees. 5. The institutional certification seems to work more as a strategy to strengthen the self-regulation role in the academic and administrative management of the institutions, than as a mechanism to ensure quality. 6. Law N° 20,129 sets out how to assess and certify the quality of a higher education institution, however it does not define quality explicitly. 7. The previous conclusions could lead us to think that it may be more convenient to consider the institutional certification as a mechanism to assess and certify the self-regulation capacity of the university institutions, than as a mechanism to assess and certify its quality. 8. It is complicated to separate the different factors that affect the quality improvement of an institution. 9. Quality and assessment are two concepts that belong together, as the certificacion process itself does not generate change or improvement, but the assessment process the certification implies fosters it. 10. It is necessary the certification process take into account aspects such as: the degree to a specific institution contributes to or impacts on the development of its environment, the contribution to the social development in its various manifestations or the contribution of universities to the comprehensive education of people. 11. The two most valued aspects by the students when deciding to study at the University were: they considered it was prestigious in its field and they considered it was certified. 12. The most important datum for the students is knowing if the university is certified, remaining the amount or years of accreditation on the second level. 13. The students associate the certification situation of a university with a greater chance of employability.