Resetting Academic Standards with Respect to Student Performance: Challenges to Higher Educational Institutions

Abstract

The digital world has changed and widened the purpose and scope of education. This envisages a rethink and revamp of the four pillars of education viz. learning to know, learning to do, learning to live together, and learning to be. Independent learning contexts and lifelong learning opportunities have widened the scope and added more pillars to the foundations of education. This necessitates change in criteria and standards of academic performance. HEIs will extend their role not solely as knowledge centers but also serving as social incubators and laboratories. The chapter expects to highlight the underlying issues governing the changes. Review of educational policies and academic standards prescribed at the National and University levels reveals a heavy reliance on academic metrics based on grades attained on exams and tests. The chapter highlights the need to include academic programs that increase employability of students, and students need to be equipped to be employable and career ready on completing the course. The efforts taken by HEIs in realizing the SDGs and students’ initiatives in taking up SDG roles and leadership also need to be taken into account for ranking both HEIs and students.

1. Introduction

Higher education in colleges and universities cater to the needs of roughly 37% of the global student population. Formal education has always favored a holistic approach, whereby the intended learning outcomes encompass knowledge, application, and skill. In 1996, a holistic and integrated vision of education based on the paradigms of lifelong learning and the four pillars viz., learning to be, to know, to do, and to live together was recommended in the report submitted to UNESCO [1]. This led to curricular revisions, wherein focus on values and life was incorporated. In the current context, it is relevant to rethink the learning outcomes so as to meet the future demands of jobs. In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, it was suggested to change the purpose of education to the following so as to incorporate a broader dimension to each entity viz., − learning to study, inquire, and co-construct together. Learning to collectively mobilize, learning to live in a common world, learning to attend and care – [2]. This becomes relevant as there has been a paradigm shift in the light of teach/study from home teaching/learning opportunities. This calls for revision in curricular objectives and standards too (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Compiled from the four pillars of education (old (Delors [1]) and newly suggested components [2] due to the changing perspectives on education). https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/reworking-four-pillars-education-sustain-commons#:~:text=To%20%E2%80%9Csimultaneously%20provide%20maps%20of,each%20deserved%20equal%20attention.

In most cases, standards are specified and incorporated to meet the quality indicators prescribed by the national accreditation agencies. Every educational institution gives high importance to the performance level of students based on specific benchmarks. Performance in academic activities is often assessed by various criteria based mostly on examinations, assignments, project review and less on classroom activity, social interactions, and participation in co-curricular activities. The nature of academic indicators varies from institutions to institutions. Of late, more and more institutions are assessing students by external criteria, consisting of out-of-class activities along with marks scored in examinations.

Ever since the advent of formalized education, it has become necessary to set standards so that the learning outcomes are specified and laid down while formulating the curriculum. This was deemed important to eliminate duplications and repetitions in the prescribed syllabi and to ensure that the content is enhanced gradually, consistently, and in a sequential manner. In many countries, the government policies of education on the advice of educational experts and advisories direct the curriculum goals and designs. The school curriculum plays an important role in prescribing the levels of higher education, which, in turn, sets the standards for higher education.

Bloom’s taxonomy, which was developed in the year 1956, provided a framework to curriculum planners and designers to specify the objectives and learning outcomes of the syllabus prescribed. This became accepted as the leading guidelines on which instructional objectives were formulated upon. The taxonomy consisted of learning outcomes that were categorized as belonging to the cognitive, psychomotor, and affective domains. Each domain may be broadly stated as pertaining to the dimensions of knowledge, skill, and attitudes, respectively. These dimensions became accepted to be regarded as significant while framing the intended learning outcomes. Later, there were modifications and additions to the objectives listed so as to encompass the domains of affective domain, especially in the assessment stage as it was found to be significant pointers to retention of learning and reinforced learning. This was attributed to long-term retention and contributed to reinforced learning and was found to be sustainable with regard to giving meaning to content (Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Blooms taxonomy of educational objectives (revised version) source: Vanderbilt University Center for teaching. https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/blooms-taxonomy/.

2. Standards of academic performances

Standards have been defined as indicators or descriptors of what certain entities should be able to demonstrate. The Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives has helped to guide and provide a structural framework to the standards set in academic contexts [3, 4]. This has helped to provide a direction and specify p learning outcomes. The educational objectives as conceived by Benjamin Bloom focus on the three domains of learning viz., cognitive, psychomotor, and affective. Each domain enlists and specifies the learning outcomes corresponding to the dimensions of knowledge, application, skill, and attitude. This in a way is utilized to define the goals, direction, and the what and the how to measure the academic performance of students.

The standards for academic performance are driven by external, as well as internal factors. The external factors are influenced by policy and governance. The internal factors are influenced by curricular goals and designs, prescribed content, instructional strategies, modes of assessment and techniques deployed, and criteria taken into account for quantifying student performance.

In many instances and contexts, the internal factors may not be ideal for assessing student performances. This is because student performance and student grades often do not reflect the right skills and capabilities of the students as standards are mostly content driven and examination oriented. Many changes are being implemented with respect to assessment modes and techniques, evaluation procedures, and strategies.

Change in future work environments and employer expectations necessitate higher educational institutions (HEIs), to put students through multi-assessment experiences, whereby the potentialities and capabilities are peer assessed and graded, so as to find the best fit during placement interviews.

3. Review of academic standards - global contexts - select countries

Most exercises in rankings of HEIs — of which Universities constitute a major component — evaluate institutions on criteria of teaching, research, student statistics based on demography and gender, knowledge transfer, and international outlook [5]. Often these rankings do not reflect the academic performances of students and do not correspond to the placement statistics. Securing a career and having an income, which leads to contributing to economic and societal well-being, need to be taken into account and inbuilt into the curricular goals. As has been often reported, a growing mismatch between the requirements of jobs that need manpower and the skills that the workforce is being equipped with right from the educational system continues to be a problem.

Many countries follow guidelines based on regulations set up for ranking institutions so that quality education is imparted and attention is given to the standard to be maintained. Majority of institutions that fall in the category of autonomous have a framework, whereby strategies are in place, which permits innovative practices and which are also considered for academic performances. Out-of-class activities and society engagement activities become criteria of academic performances. Many such assessment indicators are not very favorable to either faculty or student as these are difficult to measure and outcomes for evaluation are not very feasible.

The National Institutional Ranking Framework of the Ministry of Education, Government of India, takes into account the parameters of teaching and learning resource, research and professional practices, graduation outcomes, outreach and inclusivity, and peer perception. Graduation outcomes take into consideration only the percentage of students who have successfully passed the course.

In many countries, the content as prescribed in the syllabus, the learning outcomes, mode of instructional delivery, and modes of assessment are as specified by the quality assurance agencies and are approved as per the guidelines set apart by the regulatory bodies. These quality assessments are conducted so as to improve their rankings rather than realizing the learning outcomes and goals of education by way of helping students to secure jobs and placement assistances. These are not prescribed as a criterion for quality assessment too.

In India, the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) regulates and assesses the quality of institutions. A set of seven criteria, which are taken into consideration serves as the basis of its assessment procedures. The Internal Quality Assurance cell constituted in each HEI has been set up to conduct an internal monitoring and internal auditing of curriculum, teaching and learning, infrastructure, student progression and governance, management, and leadership. The All-India Survey of Higher Education (AISHE) of the Department of Education of the Ministry of Education, Government of India collects statistics on students pass percentage and job-securing status. However, this is mostly collected for updating the database, rather than considering it as a criterion of quality assessment and ranking the HEIs. Review of analytical and research reports has highlighted the need to streamline the indicators to ensure quality education [6, 7, 8, 9].

Policy on Higher Education by Government of Australia necessitates focusing on development of student experience and quality of learning outcomes [10, 11]. The regulatory agencies in Australia viz., TEQSA- Tertiary Education Quality Standards Agency of Australia compare the expected course learning outcomes with the specified learning outcomes for the relevant AQF level and assesses whether the design of all components of the course support achievement of the course’s learning outcomes [12].

The regulatory standards as prescribed the US Dept of Education provide autonomy to different HEIs to prescribe the criteria for academic standards and student performance. This is defined by each institution’s mission and consideration of state licensing examinations, course completion, and job placement rates. It is heartening to note that Every student Succeeds Act (ESSA) required for the first time that all students in America be taught to high academic standards that will prepare them to succeed in college and careers. Taking accountability to securing careers for students by HEIs is a welcome move as it expects HEIs to be more accountable and responsive to societal needs and promote economic well-being of the youth.

The European Higher Education Area (EHEA) considers the importance of transfer of skills acquired throughout the university period to the workplace [13]. Universities have been aimed at designing a syllabus that is more practical and that adapts to the demands of our changing world of work and that sets aside a content-based teaching [14, 15, 16, 17].

4. Challenges: higher educational institutions as employment NOT unemployment generators

4.1 Technology

Universities face many challenges in the context of evolutions in technologies, changing needs of society, changing working environments, and change in faculty and student expectations. Students expect HEIs to be clearcut pathways to future careers. If higher education needs to be relevant, it has to cater to the needs of the students and be successful launchpads to future careers. Updating curriculum, mode of instructional delivery, instructional objectives, academic standards, and inclusion of relevant criteria to assess quality all becomes significant in the light of achieving targets of Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) 4 and 8, which is concerned with imparting quality education and providing full and productive work and decent employment, respectively.

The advent of technology and prospects for digital learning have changed the possibilities for the learner and enhanced learning opportunities for the learner. Classrooms and teacher-centered classroom sessions are no longer pointers to student excellence and indicators of student performance. Many more indicators, such as self-motivation, self-driven goals, independent learning habits, self-directed targets, and independently, set self-assessment techniques and goals need to be taken into account for measuring academic performance and benchmarks for ranking higher educational institutions.

HEIs in the role of solid democratic institutions need to be responsive to the needs of the society and impart quality and responsible education. Educational policies and regulatory agencies should advocate for annual innovating and updating of the curriculum in the light of innovations in pedagogical practices and digital technologies. The threat of CHATGPT sounds the death knell for many educational, instructional, and assessment practices. Educators need to define where, one draws the line between, self-directed internalized learning outcomes and technologically assisted student outcomes. CHATGPT also offers opportunities to learn in reducing time for information retrieval, compilation, and review of literature. However, what is required and expected from students and practitioners, is to exercise critical judgment and analysis while making use of these assisted compilations rather than recognizing such shortcuts to compile literature blindly.

4.2 Changing work environments

It is observed that many countries do not consider the employment statistics of students who have successfully completed the course. This becomes important in the light of growing unemployment among the freshers and youth and the mismatch between skills required and skills of the youth completing education. Needless to state that unemployment is a drain on the world economy and we need to make higher education a pathway to securing jobs in the future for the jobs that are available.

It was reported by the International Labor Organization (ILO) that the pandemic has exacerbated the numerous labor market challenges facing those aged between 15 and 24 years, who have experienced a much higher percentage loss in employment than adults since early 2020. The total global number of unemployed youths is estimated to be 73 million (Figure 3) [18].

Figure 3.

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.TER.ENRR.

Including criteria, such as institutional activities that prepare students for jobs and make them career ready is significant in the context of achieving, the key role of decent work which has been highlighted by Sustainable Development Goal 8, which aims to “promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment, and decent work for all.”

Decent work, employment creation, social protection, rights at work, and social dialog represent integral elements of the new 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The Rio +20 Conference expressed its concerns about labor market conditions and the widespread deficits of available decent work opportunities and urged all governments to address the global challenge of youth employment.

“There has been a big expansion in higher education institutions and enrollment, particularly for low-income students, However, the results fall short of their potential, with only half of the students entering higher education receiving their degree by the time; they are 25 to 29 years old either because they are still studying or because they have dropped out.” World Bank Report

The change in work culture and work environments also has resulted in making changes in the intended objectives of the curriculum so as to prepare the students to future workforces. Exercises in industrial collaborations, opportunities to work [19]on hands on industrial and real-time projects, emphasis more on applications and problem-solving rather than memorization and recall also become challenges to HEIs. Periodic upgradation of curriculum, as pointed out earlier, thus becomes more necessary in the context of changing work environments.

5. Changing job expectations in the context of changing faculty/instructor/tutor roles

The changing role of faculty of HEIs in the context of a work-oriented curriculum calls for a work-oriented pedagogy that relies on hands on training and introduction of students to real-world problems. Problem-solving and project-based pedagogies need to be emphasized and included as an important criteria to maintain academic standard. Faculty and instructors who have industry experience and are updated with prevailing nature of work and issues make class sessions meaningful and engaging. A prior exposure to the future work issues produces competent students who are well informed and better career ready to embark on roles of entrepreneurs or employees.

The job expectations as described have also changed. Majority of students are highly ambitious and look forward to learning and growth within very short spells of time. The fast pace of life has contributed to students trying to identify work-life balance resulting in opportunities. The external quality assurance, internal quality assurance, and quality assurance agencies, all three parts are interconnected and form the basis for the European quality assurance framework [16]. The European Higher Education Area (EHEA) considers the importance of transfer of skills acquired throughout the university period to the workplace. Universities have been aimed at designing a syllabus, that is more practical and that adapts to the demands of our changing world of work, which sets aside a content-based teaching [14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20].

The increase in unemployment among university graduates who have successfully completed the course may be attributed to one of the main underlying causes of decreasing student enrolment in universities. It was reported that student concerns with regard to unemployment after graduation attributes to factors such as unsuitable work, lack career orientation, want of required job skills, market conditions, and untransparent recruitment (Figure 4) [21, 22].

Figure 4.

Unemployment, youth total (% of total labor force ages 15–24) (modeled ILO estimate) https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.UEM.1524.ZS.

The peculiar challenge of securing relevant employment placement, and prescriptions by the International Labor Organization (ILO), imploring developing economies to embrace more technical education, that can enhance self-employment, as opposed to putting more emphasis on formal primary, secondary, and tertiary education systems, points out to the necessity of developing entrepreneurship skills in the course of securing a degree [18, 23, 24].

The fast-paced and competitive world also makes it important that HEIs play a role building socio-emotional levels of the students. In this context, the increasing relevance of socio-emotional learning (SEL) emphasizes inclusion of curricular activities that instill socio-emotional learning among students who need to be equipped with the skills of good and responsible citizenship.

6. Conclusion

The chapter highlights the need to review the standards set up for assessing academic performance and to include academic programs that increase employability of students. World ranking conducted by ranking agencies has prioritized the measures taken by HEIs in realizing the SDGs into contexts for meeting the targets. National regulatory bodies need to emphasize the inclusion of career enhancement and career placement activities so as to rigorize HEIs to conceive and initiate such programs too in the co-curriculum.

It has been observed that there is high rate of dropouts among students who have enrolled for higher education. It has been reported that academic unpreparedness, low-quality education received in high school, lack of financial means of low-income students, long duration of some of the programs, and lack of flexibility to switch between them [25].

Incorporating policies that educate prospective students on the choices and merits of each academic program will prepare them to meet the requirements of the work environments. It is also required that a good support system functions in each institution that works at a differentiated and individualized level to cater to the learning styles, attitudes, and aptitudes of each student. Support system by way of scholarships, grants for living expenses, and student loans also go a long way in reducing the rate of dropouts.

As highlighted before renovating and innovating the curriculum so that industry collaboration commences early enough so that students are exposed to the emerging work areas and environments in the second year itself. Currently, industry/lab internship and project study are prescribed toward the final semester of the course. This gives students very little time to up-skill and re-skill. An inbuilt finishing school not after the course but during the course generates confident and motivated graduate student community.

To conclude, student-centered criteria that measure and monitors student’s employability and student statistics with regard to having secured successful placements also need to be considered by the accreditation agencies so that HEIs also focus on these areas rather than solely on research outputs. HEIs play an important role in generating employment, and both HEIs and labor force need to complement and supplement each other to offer sustainable and economically sound solutions.