A review of total quality management applications in schools

Full text

Findings of quality management
studies in primary and secondary
education: a systematic
literature review
Nancy Bouranta and Evangelos Psomas
Department of Business Administration of Food and Agricultural Enterprises,
University of Patras, Patras, Greece, and
Jiju Antony
Quality Management, Heriot Watt University, Edinburgh, UK
Abstract
Purpose –The aim of this paper is to present the main findings of the studies in the field of quality
management (QM) in primary and secondary education. Grouping these findings into themes and these themes,
in turn, into broad categories as well as prioritizing the themes of findings are also aims of the present study.
Design/methodology/approach –A systematic literature review (SLR) of articles focusing on QM in
primary and secondary education was carried out based on major publishers, namely Emerald Online, Taylor
and Francis, Elsevier/Science Direct, Springer Link, Sage Publishing and Online. In total, 133 articles published
in 62 journals during 1983–2019 were collected. The affinity diagram was applied in order to group the findings
of the QM studies into logical themes and these themes into broad categories. Moreover, the Pareto diagram
was applied to prioritize the themes revealed.
Findings –A plethora of articles focusing on QM in primary and secondary education have been published in
the last decades. The findings of the QM studies presented in the 133 reviewed articles are grouped into 43
themes and these themes, in turn, into 6 broad categories, namely management practices, school
characteristics, teachers, stakeholders, government and pupils. The analysis also reveals themes that can be
characterized as “vital”and “useful.”
Practical implications –Researchers and school managers can take into consideration the findings of the
QM studies in primary and secondary education as well as the themes of high priority for the design of future
studies and QM implementation plans, respectively.
Originality/value –This is the first literature review study which presents analytically the findings of the
QM studies in primary and secondary education. This study also contributes to the literature by formulating
meaningful themes of these findings and broad categories of these themes and by prioritizing the themes
revealed.
Keywords Quality management, Primary and secondary education, Study findings, Systematic literature
review
Paper type Literature review
1. Introduction
Quality management (QM) implementation in primary and secondary educational
institutions is fairly recent as interest surged from 1990 onwards (Nawelwa et al., 2015).
Specifically, the first article in this field was published in 1983, providing a comprehensive
model of total quality management (TQM) implementation in schools (Kelly and Lassa, 1983).
Kwan (1996, p. 28) stated that “education differs from the manufacturing sector in four ways:
objectives, processes, inputs and outputs.”Education services are often difficult to be
measured; since the outcome is reflected in the cognitive and behavioral transformation of
students, the quality attributes vary according to different stakeholders (headmasters,
teachers, pupils, parents, local community members) and many schools do not have
management autonomy or independence (Kwan, 1996;Tsinidou et al., 2010). So, QM
implementation in educational institutions is questioned mainly due to the essential
Findings of
QM studies in
education
Received 9 February 2020
Revised 11 June 2020
29 July 2020
Accepted 28 August 2020
The TQM Journal
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1754-2731
DOI 10.1108/TQM-02-2020-0020
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/1754-2731.htm

characteristics of education. In other words, there is a debate among researchers and
practitioners concerning the ability of QM to address problems in the field of education
(Quong and Walker, 1996;Doherty, 2008;Soria-Garcia and Mart

ınez-Lorente, 2014;Cruz
et al., 2016).
The ISO 9001 Quality Management System (QMS) in primary and secondary educational
institutions is considered suitable for improving schools (Thonhauser and Passmore, 2006;
Diaz and Martinez-Mediano, 2018;Rodr

ıguez-Mantilla et al., 2018). The European Foundation
of Quality Management (EFQM) model also proposes a guide to support educational
institutions’self-evaluation and push these institutions towards excellence (Doherty, 2008;
Anastasiadou et al., 2014;Cruz et al., 2016;Sarrico and Rosa, 2016;Fernandez-Diaz et al., 2017;
Rodr

ıguez-Mantilla et al., 2018). In the last few years, researchers and practitioners have
supported TQM implementation in the services sector, with slim modifications compared to
the manufacturing sector (Talib et al., 2013;Psomas and Jaca, 2016;Bouranta et al., 2019).
More specifically, studies have tried theoretically or empirically to evaluate TQM suitability
in educational contexts, shedding light on this indefinite field (Murgatroud, 1992;Kwan, 1996;
Lagrosen, 1999;Weller, 2000;Cheng, 2003;Svensson and Klefsjo, 2006;Doherty, 2008;
Toremen et al., 2009;Hlongwane and Mestry, 2013;Sulaiman et al., 2013;Soria-Garcia and
Mart

ınez-Lorente, 2014;Nawelwa et al., 2015;Fernandez-Diaz et al., 2017;Diaz and Martinez-
Mediano, 2018). It is evident that TQM principles such as teamwork, continuous
improvement, training, collaboration between management and pupils, management
commitment and school culture have been put into practice in schools successfully
(Nawelwa et al., 2015). TQM tools and techniques, proposed mainly by Crosby and Deming,
lead to greater quality outcomes in academic areas (Yoshida, 1994;Crawford and Shutler,
1999;Hofman et al., 2008;LeMahieu et al., 2017). Expanding the quality journey, it has also
been proposed that Lean philosophy can be applied in the education sector to improve
classroom teaching (LeMahieu et al., 2017) and control the cost, bureaucracy and waste
associated with managing educational institutions (Srichai et al., 2013).
However, the journey of educational institutions to quality is not without challenges and
dilemmas (Ng, 2008). Practical implementation of QM faces various obstacles and problems
(Pourrajab et al., 2015). Implementing the ISO 9001 standard seems to be time-consuming, as
the time required to obtain ISO 9001 registration, irrespective of school type, size or cost, is on
average 16.5 months (Thonhauser and Passmore, 2006;Thonhauser, 2008;Sebola and
Malema, 2014). Doherty (2008, p. 261) pointed out that “developing TQM in education
requires some intellectual effort and lateral thinking, and not facile misapplication of
business vocabulary and techniques.”Thus, there is a need for effective change management
(Toremen et al., 2009;Cheng and Yau, 2011), which overcomes resistance to change stemming
from overconfidence in the status quo (Pourrajab et al., 2015).
Very few literature review studies focusing on management issues in primary and
secondary education have been conducted so far. For example, the systematic literature
review (SLR) study of Bush and Glover (2016) focused on school leadership and management
in South Africa. In the same vein, Bush et al. (2018) reviewed the Malaysian literature on three
prominent school leadership models (instructional, distributed and transformational).
Literature review studies have also been conducted in the field of QM in higher education
(HE) such as those of Balzer et al. (2016),Tan et al. (2016),Tari and Dick (2016). QMS
implementation began in universities (Konidari and Abernot, 2006;Cheng and Yau, 2011;
Galvez et al., 2016) and later these systems were applied to primary and secondary schools
(Cruz et al., 2016); this may be the reason why a few SLR studies in the QM field have already
been conducted at the HE level, but hardly any at the pre-university level (Galvez et al., 2016).
Diaz and Martinez-Mediano (2018, p. 7) pointed out that “there is a high need to gather
systematic evidence based on rigorous research to settle debates on QMS merits in
educational organizations.”Following this suggestion, the present study attempts to shed
TQM

light on what has already been revealed in the field of QM in primary and secondary
education, by thoroughly gathering and analyzing existing evidence. This will help scholars
create a clear view and clarify any controversies about the implementation of QM in primary
and secondary education.
Based on the above-mentioned literature gap and given the nascent stage of QM research
in the education sector, a SLR was conducted in the present study focusing on the QM studies
in primary and secondary education, contributing, thus, to the literature. More specifically,
more than one hundred relevant articles were systematically reviewed in order to present
analytically the findings of the QM studies in primary and secondary education, group these
findings into meaningful themes and these themes, in turn, into broad categories, and finally,
prioritize the themes revealed. Consequently, this study attempts to answer the following
research questions through a comprehensive SLR:
RQ1. To what themes and broad categories the findings of the QM studies in primary
and secondary education can be grouped into?
RQ2. How can the themes and broad categories of findings of the QM studies in primary
and secondary education be prioritized?
The structure of the paper is as follows: in the next section, the SLR methodology is presented.
In the following section, the results of the SLR are analytically presented and discussed. The
conclusions and practical implications are then presented. Finally, the limitations of this
study and the authors’suggestions for future literature review studies are presented.
2. Methodology
The SLR conducted in the present study was based on the methodology proposed by
Tranfield et al. (2003). According to this methodology, SLR consists of three stages: planning,
conducting and reporting/dissemination. The same methodology has also been applied by
Tari and Dick (2016) in reviewing QM in HE institutions as well as Psomas et al. (2019) in
reviewing the future research agenda of QM in primary and secondary education.
2.1 Stage I planning the review
Prior to beginning the review, a panel of experts in the area of quality education was formed.
The panel consisted of four practitioners (two schoolteachers and two principals) and three
academic experts. The panel determined the review protocol, making decisions about the
objective of the study (formulating the research questions), the population of articles (key
data resource), the search strategy for identification of relevant articles and the criteria for
inclusion and exclusion of articles in the review. The review team, consisting of the authors of
this paper, checked for any significant omissions or oversights resulting from the selection of
search terms, databases, etc. (Hu et al., 2015).
The research limited its focus by acknowledging only publishers of peer-reviewed
academic articles in management science. The practice of using only peer-reviewed articles,
which are considered validated knowledge (Ordanini et al., 2008), is common in reviewing the
QM field (Al-Kurdi et al., 2018;Prakash, 2018). The selected academic publishers were the
following: Emerald Insight, Taylor and Francis, Elsevier/Science Direct, Springer Link, Sage
Publishing, and Wiley Online. The same list of publishers has been used in similar SLR
studies in HE (Al-Kurdi et al., 2018;Prakash, 2018). Incomplete access to several other
academic databases limited the focus of the present SLR on the above-mentioned databases.
All article types, such as literature reviews, conceptual and empirical articles meaning case
studies and surveys were included in the sample (Bhamu and Sangwan, 2014). Explicit
descriptions of what types of published articles were included and excluded from the review
Findings of
QM studies in
education

are presented in Table 1. The inclusion and exclusion criteria were adopted to limit selection
bias on behalf of the review team, exclude the irrelevant articles and ensure viable results.
The relevant search terms and keywords used to identify articles include: QMS, Quality
Assurance, ISO 9001, TQM, Business Excellence, Lean, and Six Sigma as these are QM
methods and philosophies applied by business and HE institutions as well as common
subjects examined in the QM field (Tari and Dick, 2016).
2.2 Stage II conducting the review
To identify relevant articles and create the article sample, search strings were constructed
based on the search terms and keywords identified in the planning stage. A search string is a
combination of search terms, two or more words in a certain order, which are entered by a
user into a search engine (search box) to find desired results. An example of search string is
the following: (QMS) OR (Quality Assurance) OR (ISO 9001) OR (TQM) OR (Business
Excellence) OR (Lean) OR (Six Sigma) AND (education) OR (school) OR (primary and
secondary education). The search strings were applied in the same way to the academic
databases, resulting in many related articles. Based on their title, abstract and keywords, the
articles were screened appropriately and examined for their fit with the research focus of the
study. In some cases, where the relevance was not clear enough, the review team read the full
article. The disciplined hand screening process extracted 169 articles. The members of the
review team individually read the abstracts of the articles and excluded those which focused
on topics in remote research areas. In a meeting, they consented to the removal of 36 articles;
thus, the final sample included 133 relevant articles (Table 2).
Following the procedure of SLR, contained fields concerning the article title, the year of
publication, the data resource, the journal, the authors’surnames, the article type, the
geographic research area and the number and type of schools studied were extracted to an
excel spreadsheet (Tranfield et al., 2003;Hu et al., 2015). In addition, each member of the
review team read the selected sample articles in full so that each article was studied by at least
two reviewers. Each reviewer extracted and stored qualitative data concerning the study
findings from the included articles in a separate database (on an excel spreadsheet). Due to the
broad scope of the research questions, the review team systematized the study findings
highlighting potential aspects more frequently addressed in the articles. An affinity diagram
was applied to organize the mixed findings, based on their affinity, into clusters of
meaningful themes (Moura Sa and Martins, 2016;Psomas et al., 2019). More specifically, two
of the reviewers separately examined the findings of the QM studies, looking for similarities
Inclusion criteria Exclusion criteria
Well-known databases: Emerald Insight, Taylor and
Francis, Elsevier/Science Direct, Springer Link, Sage
Publishing, and Wiley Online
Non-academic databases
Academic journals Books, online sites and grey literature (conferences,
master’s theses, doctoral dissertations, textbooks,
reports, working papers from research groups,
technical reports, etc.)
Articles studying QMS, Quality Assurance, ISO
9001, TQM, Business Excellence, Lean, Six Sigma
Articles studying service quality
Articles related to primary and secondary education Articles related to post-secondary, vocational,
technical, business, distance, tertiary and higher
education
Articles written in the English language Articles written in any other language, except English
Table 1.
Inclusion and
exclusion criteria for
the literature review
TQM

Paper title
Publication
year Journal Authors
Paper
type
The Quality of Learning in
Nigerian Primary Education.
The UPE Programme 1976–
1982
1983 International Review of
Education
Kelly, Lassa CS
The Quality of Primary
Education in Developing
Countries: Who Defines and
Who Decides?
1991 Comparative Education Stephens CP
A New Frame for Managing
Schools: Total Quality
Management (TQM)
1992 School Organization Murgatroud CP
Quality Assurance in
Education Systems
1994 Studies in Educational
Evaluation
Cuttance CP
Quality Assurance in
Secondary Education
1994 Quality Assurance in
Education
Freeman CP
The Deming Approach to
Education: A Comparative
Study of the USA and Japan
1994 International Journal of
Educational
Management
Yoshida CP
Application of Total Quality
Management in Education:
Retrospect and Prospect
1996 International Journal of
Educational
Management
Kwan CP
TQM and School
Restructuring: A CS
1996 School Organization Quong, Walker CS
Quality of Education and the
Demand for Education:
Evidence from Developing
Countries
1996 International Review of
Education
Bergmann CS
Leadership and the
Development of Quality
Culture in Schools
1997 International Journal of
Educational
Management
Berry CP
Gifted Education Long-Range
Planning: Using Time Wisely
with TQM
1997 Roeper Review McGonagill CP
Quality of Learning in
Nigeria’s Universal Primary
Education Scheme-1976–1986
1997 The Urban Review Asagwara CS
A Reassessment of the
Indicators of Primary
Education Quality in
Developing Countries:
Emerging Evidence from
Tanzania
1998 International Review of
Education
Mosha RP
Total Quality Management in
Education: Problems and
Issues for the Classroom
Teacher
1999 International Journal of
Educational
Management
Crawford, Shutler CP
TQM Goes to School: An
Effective Way of Improving
School Quality
1999 The TQM Magazine Lagrosen CS
Measuring the Quality of
Education at Two Levels: A CS
of Primary Schools in Rural
Ethiopia
1999 International Review of
Education
Verwimp RP
(continued )
Table 2.
Papers information
(sorted by
publication year)
Findings of
QM studies in
education

Paper title
Publication
year Journal Authors
Paper
type
School Attendance Problems:
Using the TQM Tools to
Identify Root Causes
2000 Journal of Educational
Administration
Weller CS
Realising the Value of Self-
assessment: The Influence of
the Business Excellence Model
on teacher professionalism
2000 European Journal of
Teacher Education
Powell RP
Quality Assessment of
Continuing Education Short
Courses
2001 Quality Assurance in
Education
Kabouridis, Link RP
The Reform of Secondary
Education in Indonesia During
the 1990s: Basic Education ...
2002 Asia Pacific Education
Review
Yeom, Acedo, Utomo CS
Decentralization and
Marketization of Education in
Singapore: A CS of the School
Excellence Model
2003 Journal of Educational
Administration
Mok CS
Quality Assurance in
Education: Internal, Interface,
and Future
2003 Quality Assurance in
Education
Cheng CP
The Measurement of Quality
Management Culture in
Schools: Development and
Validation of the SQMCS
2003 Journal of Operations
Management
Detert, Schroeder,
Cudeck
RP
Four Types of School
Environment: Multilevel Self-
Management and Educational
Quality
2004 Educational Research
and Evaluation
Cheng, Cheung RP
From TQM to Learning
Organisation: Another Way
for Quality Management in
Educational Institutions
2006 International Journal of
Quality, Reliability
Management
Konidari, Abernot RP
Total Quality Management in
Secondary Schools in Kenya:
Extent of Practice
2006 Quality Assurance in
Education
Ngware, Wamukuru,
Odebero
RP
TQM-based Self-Assessment
in the Education Sector:
Experiences from a Swedish
Upper Secondary School
Project
2006 Quality Assurance in
Education
Svensson, Klefsjo RP
ISO 9000 in Education: A
Comparison between the
United States and England
2006 Research in
Comparative and
International
Education
Thonhauser,
Passmore
RP
The Impact of Education
Reform on the Quality
Assurance System in Japan
2007 Educational Research
for Policy and Practice
Knipprath, Arimoto CP
Policy of Quality Assurance in
Hong Kong Preschools
2007 Early Child
Development and Care
Dora GR
Excellence and Education:
Rhetoric and Reality
2007 Education, Knowledge,
Economy
Gillies CP
Table 2. (continued )
TQM

Paper title
Publication
year Journal Authors
Paper
type
The System for Evaluating
the: Quality of Russian
Education
2007 Russian Education,
Society
Bolotov, Efremova CP
Pedagogical Renewal for
Quality Universal Primary
Education: Overview of
Trends in Sub-Saharan Africa
2007 International Review of
Education
Dembele, Lefoka CP
Quality Assurance and
Assessment in Education in
Papua New Guinea
2007 Educational Research
for Policy and Practice
Mel CS
Quality Assurance and School
Monitoring in Hong Kong
2007 Educational Research
for Policy and Practice
Mok CS
The Challenge of Increasing
Access and Improving Quality:
An Analysis of Universal
Primary Education
Interventions in Kenya and
Tanzania since the 1970s
2007 International Review of
Education
Sifuna CS
Elusive Search for Quality
Education: The Case of Quality
Assurance and Teacher
Accountability
2008 International Journal of
Educational
Management
Odhiambo GR
The Phases and Paradoxes of
Educational Quality
Assurance: The Case of the
Singapore Education System
2008 Quality Assurance in
Education
Ng CS
A Comparative Study of
Singapore’s School Excellence
Model with Hong Kong’s
School-based Management
2008 International Journal of
Educational
Management
Ng, Chan CS
On Quality in Education 2008 Quality Assurance in
Education
Doherty VP
Instructional Leadership for
Quality Learning. An
Assessment of the Impact of
the Primary School
Management Development
Project in Botswana
2008 Educational
Management
Administration,
Leadership
Pansiri RP
Internal versus External
Quality Management
2008 International Journal of
Leadership in
Education
Hofman, Dijkstra,
Hofman
RP
Factors that Relate to the Time
to ISO 9000 Registration in
Education Institutions
2008 School Effectiveness
and School
Improvement
Thonhauser RP
Achieving Universal
Elementary Education in
India: Future Strategies for
Ensuring Access, Quality and
Finance
2008 The Journal of Applied
Economic Research
Banerji, Mukherjee CS
Total Quality Management
Practices in Turkish Primary
Schools
2009 Quality Assurance in
Education
Toremen, Karakus
¸,
Yasan
RP
(continued )Table 2.
Findings of
QM studies in
education

Paper title
Publication
year Journal Authors
Paper
type
Implementing School
Performance Index (SPIn) in
Malaysian Primary Schools
2009 International Journal of
Educational
Management
Othman, Rauf RP
Quality Assurance and
Evaluation in Denmark
2009 Journal of Education
Policy
Andersen, Dahler-
Larsen, Pedersen
CS
Research on the Teaching
Quality of Compulsory
Education in China’s West
Rural Schools
2009 Frontiers of Education
in China
Jiayi, Ying RP
Transforming Children’s Lives
Through Innovation in Quality
Education: Implications for
Policy and Practice
2009 IDS Introductory and
Development Studies
Oswald, Moriarty CP
Developing and Implementing
Quality Inclusive Education in
Hong Kong, Implications for
Teacher Education
2010 Journal of Research in
Special Educational
Needs
Forlin CS
Synergies and Balance
between Values Education and
Quality Teaching
2010 Educational
Philosophy and Theory
Lovat CP
Principals’and Teachers’
Perceptions of Quality
Management in Hong Kong
Primary Schools
2011 Quality Assurance in
Education
Cheng, Yau RP
Defining School Effectiveness
in the Reform for Quality-
Oriented Education
2011 International
Perspectives on
Education and Society
Cravens, Chu, Zhao RP
Management by Objectives:
The Swedish Experience in
Upper Secondary Schools
2011 Journal of Educational
Administration
Lindberg, Wilson RP
Quality of Primary Education
Inputs in Urban Schools:
Evidence From Nairobi
2011 Education and Urban
Society
Ngware, Oketch, Ezeh RP
Leadership and Quality
Management: An Analysis of
Three Key Features of the
Greek Education System
2012 Quality Assurance in
Education
Saiti CP
Quality and Effectiveness in
Greek primary school
2012 Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences
Babalis, Tsoli,
Koutouvela, Stavrou,
Alexopoulos
RP
Exploring School
Improvement in Hong Kong
Secondary Schools
2012 Peabody Journal of
Education
Ko, Hallinger, Walker RP
Quality of Education,
Earnings and Demand
Function for Schooling in
Egypt: An Economic Analysis
2012 Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences
Biltagy RP
Reconstruction of
Infrastructure for Quality
Assurance in Nigeria Public
Secondary Schools
2012 Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences
Asaaju RP
Table 2. (continued )
TQM

Paper title
Publication
year Journal Authors
Paper
type
Job Satisfaction: Factor
Analysis of Greek Primary
School Principals’Perceptions
2012 International Journal of
Educational
Management
Saiti, Fassoulis RP
Discourses and Policies on
Educational Quality in
Argentina, 1990–2010
2012 Research in
Comparative and
International
Education
Gorostiaga, Ferreira CS
Educational Innovation,
Quality, and Effects: An
Exploration of Innovations
and Their Effects in Secondary
Education
2012 Educational Policy Hofman, Boom,
Meeuwisse, Hofman
RP
Investigating the Relationship
Between the Quality of
Education and Level of
Educational Attainment in
Turkish Provinces
2012 International Journal of
Educational Reform
Gumus CS
Understanding Local Realities
of Quality Education in Kenya:
Pupil, Parent and Teacher
Perspectives
2012 Research in
Comparative and
International
Education
Cunningham RP
Balanced Performance
Management in the Public
Education System: An
Empirical Study of Estonian
General Education Schools
2013 Baltic Journal of
Management
Ploom, Haldma RP
Principals’Perceptions of
“quality”in Mauritian Schools
Using the Baldrige Framework
2013 Journal of Educational
Administration
Ah-Teck, Starr RP
The Effect of Political Stability
on Public Education Quality
2013 International Journal of
Educational
Management
Nir, Kafle RP
Managing School Safety in
Thailand: Assessing the
Implications and Potential of a
Lean Thinking Framework
2013 SAGE Open Srichai, Yodmongkol,
Sureephong,
Meksamoot
RP
Educational Quality
Differences in a Middle-Income
Country: The Urban-Rural
Gap in Malaysian Primary
Schools
2013 School Effectiveness
and School
Improvement
Othman, Muijs RP
Empowering Teacher Teams
to Implement the Integrated
Quality Management Systems
in South African Secondary
Schools
2013 Journal of Social
Sciences
Hlongwane, Mestry RP
The Decentralisation of Power
within the Total Quality
Management (TQM) Paradigm
in Classroom Management
2013 Journal of Social
Sciences
Ngwenya RP
(continued )Table 2.
Findings of
QM studies in
education

Paper title
Publication
year Journal Authors
Paper
type
The Quest for Quality
Education: The Case of
Curriculum Innovations in
Kenya
2013 European Journal of
Training and
Development
Bunyi GR
Level of Total Quality
Management Adoption in
Qatari Educational
Institutions: Private and Semi-
Government Sector
2013 Journal of Education for
Business
Sulaiman,
Manochehri, Al-
Esmail
RP
Total Quality Management in
Mauritian Education and
Principals’Decision-Making
for School Improvement:
“Driven”or “Informed”by
Data?
2014 Journal of Educational
Administration
Ah-Teck, Starr RP
The European Foundation
Quality Management
evaluation of Greek Primary
and Secondary Education
2014 Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences
Anastasiadou,
Zirinoglou, Florou
RP
Are School Boards aware of
the educational quality of their
schools?
2014 Educational
Management
Administration,
Leadership
Hooge, Honingh RP
An Investigation on Work-
Related Behaviors and
Perceptions of School Quality
Management Culture of K-12
Teachers
2014 The Anthropologist Kiremitci, Gencer,
Demiray, Unutmaz
RP
Development and Validation
of a Measure of the Quality
Management Practices in
Education
2014 Total Quality
Management, Business
Excellence
Soria-Garcia,
Mart

ınez-Lorente
RP
South African Teachers’
Perception of Integrated
Quality Management Systems:
Mopani District Secondary
Schools, Limpopo Province
2014 Journal of Social
Sciences
Sebola, Malema RP
Exploring Factors
Contributing to School
Improvement in South African
Secondary Schools in the Free
State Province
2014 International Journal of
Educational Sciences
Makoelle RP
The Social Reconstructionist
Approach to Teacher
Education: A Necessary
Component to Achieving
Excellence and Quality
Education for All
2014 Research in
Comparative and
International
Education
Mayne RP
An Analysis of Total Quality
Management (TQM) Practices
in Zambian Secondary
Schools: A Survey of Lusaka
District
2015 The TQM Journal Nawelwa,
Sichinsambwe,
Mwanza
RP
Table 2. (continued )
TQM

Paper title
Publication
year Journal Authors
Paper
type
The Resistance to Change in
Implementation of Total
Quality Management (TQM) in
Iranian Schools
2015 The TQM Journal Pourrajab, Basri,
Daud , Asimiran
RP
From Inspection to Quality:
Ways in which School
Inspection Influences Change
in Schools
2015 Studies in Educational
Evaluation
Gustafsson , Ehren ,
Conyngham,
McNamara, Altrichter,
O’Hara
RP
School-based Management:
An Approach to Decision-
Making Quality in Egyptian
General Secondary Schools
2015 School Leadership,
Management
Elmelegy CS
The relationship between
Classroom Quality and
Students’Engagement in
Secondary School
2015 Educational
Psychology
Virtanen, Lerkkanen,
Poikkeus, Kuorelahti
RP
Managing School Internal
Mechanisms for Performance
Improvement in Secondary
Education: Case of Six
Secondary Schools in Eastern
Zone in Tanzania
2015 SAGE Open Chua, Mosha RP
Quality Education for All? A
CS of a New Delhi Government
School
2015 Policy Futures in
Education
Sarin CS
The Perceived Impact of Open
Inspection Data on the Quality
of Education in Dutch Primary
Schools: A Parent Perspective
2015 Social Science
Computer Review
Kool, Bekkers RP
Evaluation of the Impact of
Quality Management Systems
on School Climate
2016 International Journal of
Educational
Management
Galvez, Cruz, Diaz RP
Impact of Quality
Management Systems on
Teaching-Learning Processes
2016 Quality Assurance in
Education
Cruz, Galvez,
Santaolalla
RP
Supply Chain quality
Management in Education
2016 International Journal of
Quality, Reliability
Management
Sarrico, Rosa RP
Improving the Quality of
Education through Self-
Evaluation in Dutch
Secondary Schools
2016 Studies in Educational
Evaluation
van der Bij, Geijsel, ten
Damd
RP
Observing Instructional
Quality in the Context of
School Evaluation
2016 Learning and
Instruction
Taut, Rakoczy RP
The Best Laid Plans: An
Examination of School Plan
Quality and Implementation in
a School Improvement
Initiative
2016 Educational
Administration
Quarterly
Strunk, Marsh, Bush-
Mecenas, Duque
RP
(continued )Table 2.
Findings of
QM studies in
education

Paper title
Publication
year Journal Authors
Paper
type
Impact of Implementation of
Quality Management Systems
on Internal Communications
and External Relations at
Schools
2016 Total Quality
Management, Business
Excellence
Fernandez-Diaz,
Rodriguez-Mantilla,
Abad
RP
Quality Improvement in
Secondary Schools:
Developing a School Self-
evaluation Scale
2016 International Journal of
Educational Sciences
Senol, Dagli RP
The Impact of Professional
Capital on Educational
Excellence And equality in
Estonia
2016 Journal of Professional
Capital and Community
Kitsing, Boyle,
Kukemelk, Mikk
VP
Contributions of Education for
Sustainable Development
(ESD) to Quality Education: A
Synthesis of Research
2016 Journal of Education for
Sustainable
Development
Laurie, Nonoyama-
Tarumi, McKeown,
Hopkins
RP
Stakeholder Perceptions of
Secondary Education Quality
in Sokoto State, Nigeria
2017 Quality Assurance in
Education
Ibrahim, Arshad,
Salleh
RP
Lean for Education 2017 Quality Assurance in
Education
LeMahieu,
Nordstrum, Greco
RP
Evaluation of the Impact of
Intervention Programmes on
Education Organisations:
Application to a Quality
Management System
2017 Evaluation and
Program Planning
Fernandez-Diaz,
Rodriguez-Mantilla,
Jover-Olmeda
RP
Analytical View of Bahrain’s
Government Schools’
Performance: A Quality
Perspective
2017 SAGE Open Albaker RP
Equality and Excellence.
Hegemonic Discourses of
Economisation within the
German Education System
2017 International Studies in
Sociology of Education
Peter, Brockling CP
Proposed Policy for
Preparation of High-Quality
Primary School Teachers in
Thailand
2017 Kasetsart Journal of
Social Sciences
Mattavarat,
Viseshsiri,
Siribanpitak
RP
Key Performance Indicators
for Excellent Teachers in
Malaysia: A Measurement
Model for Excellent Teaching
Practices
2017 International Journal of
Productivity and
Performance
Management
Amzat RP
Quality of Malaysian Teachers
Based on Education and
Training: A Benefit and
Earnings Returns Analysis
Using Human Capital Theory
2017 Quality Assurance in
Education
Ismail, Awang RP
Table 2. (continued )
TQM

Paper title
Publication
year Journal Authors
Paper
type
Subtle Convergence? Locating
Similarities between Chinese
Educational Reforms and
Global Quality Assurance and
Evaluation Trends
2017 Quality Assurance in
Education
Suominen, Kallo,
Rinne, Fan
LR
High Quality in Primary
Humanities: Insights from the
UK’s School Inspectorates
2017 Education Catling RP
Quality Revolution in post-
Soviet Education in Russia:
From Control to Assurance?
2017 Journal of Education
Policy
Minina CS
The Role of Headteachers,
Teachers, and School
Counselors in the System of
Quality Assessment and
Assurance of School Work
2017 SAGE Open Podgornik, Vogrinc RP
The Impact of ISO Quality
Management Systems on
Primary and Secondary
Schools in Spain
2018 Quality Assurance in
Education
Diaz, Martinez-
Mediano
RP
Relationship Between
Perceived Directors’
Leadership and Classroom
Quality of Primary Schools in
Thailand
2018 Kasetsart Journal of
Social Sciences
Thawinkarn, Tang,
Ariratana
RP
Factors Associated with the
Impact of Implementing
Quality Management Systems
at Schools: A Multilevel
Analysis
2018 Total Quality
Management, Business
Excellence
Rodriguez-Mantilla,
Fernandez-Cruz,
Fernandez-Diaz
RP
Community Participation in
Quality Assurance in
Secondary School
Management: The Case of
School-Based Management
Committee (SBMC)
2019 Quality Assurance in
Education
Ezenwaji, Otu,
Ezegbe, Okide, Eseadi
RP
Ensuring Quality Education?
Low-Fee Private Schools and
Government Regulation in
Three sub-Saharan African
Capitals
2019 International Journal of
Educational
Development
Harma RP
The Quality-Access Tradeoff
in Decentralizing Public
Services: Evidence from
Education in the OECD and
Spain
2019 Journal of Comparative
Economics
Guerra, Lastra-
Anadon
RP
Towards an Operationalized
and Effective School Self-
Evaluation System: An
Ongoing Action Research
Study in Chinese Secondary
Schools since 2011
2019 Studies in Educational
Evaluation
Chen, Su, Zheng, Li RP
(continued )Table 2.
Findings of
QM studies in
education

Paper title
Publication
year Journal Authors
Paper
type
Irish Teachers, Starting on a
Journey of Data Use for School
Self-Evaluation
2019 Studies in Educational
Evaluation
Brien, McNamara,
O’Hara, Brown
RP
What Matters to Teachers if
Evaluation Is Meant to Help
Them Improve?
2019 Studies in Educational
Evaluation
Liu, Visone, Mongillo,
Lisi
RP
The Impact of Conflict among
Political Actors on
Implementing South Korea’s
New Teacher Evaluation
Policy: A CS with Implications
for Education Policymaking
2019 Studies in Educational
Evaluation
Yoo CS
Validation of a Questionnaire
to Evaluate the Impact of ISO
9001 Standards in Schools
with a Confirmatory Factor
Analysis
2019 Studies in Educational
Evaluation
Rodr

ıguez-Mantilla,
Fern
andez-D

ıaz,
Carrascosa
RP
Improving Education Equality
and Quality: Evidence from a
Natural Experiment in China
2019 International Journal of
Educational
Development
Zhang, Qin, Liu RP
A Struggle for Translation: An
Actor-Network Analysis of
Chilean School Violence and
School Climate Policies
2019 Educational
Management
Administration,
Leadership
L
opez, Sisto, Baleriola,
Garcia, Carrasco,
N
u~
nez, Vald
es
RP
Effectiveness of the Clinical
Supervision Strategy as a Tool
for Improving Teaching
Quality: Perceptions of South
African School-Based
Managers and Educators
2019 Africa Education
Review
Musundire, Dreyer RP
School Teachers’and
Administrators’Opinions
about Disability Services,
Quality of Schools, Total
Quality Management and
Quality Tools
2019 International Journal of
Disability,
Development and
Education
Ozberk, Sharma, Dagli RP
Assessing the Impact of ISO:
9001 Implementation on
School Teaching and Learning
Processes
2019 Quality Assurance in
Education
Fern
andez-Cruz,
Rodr

ıguez-Mantilla,
Fern
andez-D

ıaz
RP
Quality Management
Principles and School Quality:
Testing Moderation of
Professional Certification of
School Principal in Private
Schools of Pakistan
2019 The TQM Journal Elahi, Ilyas RP
A Measurement Instrument
for Implementing Total
Quality Management in Greek
Primary and Secondary
Education
2019 International Journal of
Educational
Management
Sfakianaki RP
Table 2. (continued )
TQM

among them. They placed those related to each other on one column of an excel sheet. The
decision for clustering the statements of the study findings was based on the main element
emphasized in each statement. Then, the reviewers named each cluster of findings using a
single word or short phrase. The labeling of the clusters reflects the content of the respective
statements, and it is based on the reviewer subjective opinion. A meeting of the review team
was then held to form a consensus on identification. So, the descriptive nature of the data in
this charting phase led to the identification of themes of findings of the QM studies in primary
and secondary education. Furthermore, in line with the methodology of Aquilani et al. (2017)
and Bajaj et al. (2018) and based on the number of the study findings of each theme, the Pareto
diagram was applied to determine whether the Pareto principle 80/20 exists. The statistical
software Minitab, version 19, was used for this purpose. The bars of the diagram, which are
presented in descending order, represent the groups of findings and their height reflect the
frequency of their occurrence. The curve represents the cumulative percentage of themes’
number of the QM findings, distinguishing the vital few themes, if any (20% of the themes
that account for 80% of the findings of the QM studies), from the useful many themes (80% of
the themes that account for 20% of the findings of the QM studies). In so doing, a
prioritization list of themes is created for the academics and practitioners/school managers to
focus on.
2.3 Stage III reporting and dissemination
Based on the excel spreadsheet developed in Stage II and the affinity diagram, a clear picture
of the sample articles was created. A full report including an introduction, methodological
protocol, commentary on the nature of the evidence identified, detailed findings and
conclusions, was written. The main parts of this report are presented in this paper. Before the
dissemination of the report, the panel of experts assessed its scientific quality and
completeness. In order to reach a range of educational policymakers and academics, parts of
the report were presented at an international conference.
3. Results and discussion
3.1 Descriptive analysis of the reviewed articles
The 133 reviewed articles were published in 62 journals distributed by 6 publishers (Table 3).
Most of the journals (56.4%) publishing the sample articles in the field of QM in primary and
Paper title
Publication
year Journal Authors
Paper
type
Comparative Analysis
between Management Team
and Teachers on the Impact of
ISO 9001 Standards in
Educational Centres
2019 International Journal of
Quality and Service
Sciences
Rodr

ıguez-Mantilla,
Fern
andez-Cruz,
Fern
andez-D

ıaz
RP
Lean Thinking for Education:
Development and Validation
of an Instrument
2019 International Journal of
Quality, Reliability
Management
Sfakianaki, Kakouris RP
Investigating the Barriers to
Change Management in Public
Sector Educational
Institutions
2019 International Journal of
Educational
Management
Al-Alawi,
Abdulmohsen, Al-
Malki, Mehrotra
RP
Note(s): CS: case study, LR: literature review, CP: conceptual paper, RP: research paper, GR: general reviews,
VP: viewpoint Table 2.
Findings of
QM studies in
education

Publisher –Journals Number of articles %
Emerald 48 36.1
Quality Assurance in Education 18 13.5
International Journal of Educational Management 12 9
Journal of Educational Administration 5 3.8
The TQM Journal 3 2.3
International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management 3 2.3
The TQM Magazine 1 0.8
International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences 1 0.8
Journal of Professional Capital and Community 1 0.8
International Journal of Productivity & Performance Management 1 0.8
Baltic Journal of Management 1 0.8
European Journal of Training and Development 1 0.8
International Journal of Educational Management 1 0.8
Taylor and Francis 31 23.3
Total Quality Management and Business Excellence 3 2.3
Journal of Social Sciences 3 2.3
International Journal of Educational Sciences 2 1.5
Journal of Education Policy 2 1.5
School Effectiveness and School Improvement 2 1.5
School Organisation 2 1.5
Africa Education Review 1 0.8
Comparative Education 1 0.8
Early Child Development and Care 1 0.8
Education 1 0.8
Education, Knowledge and Economy 1 0.8
Educational Psychology 1 0.8
Educational Research and Evaluation 1 0.8
International Journal of Disability, Development and Education 1 0.8
European Journal of Teacher Education 1 0.8
International Journal of Leadership in Education 1 0.8
International Studies in Sociology of Education 1 0.8
Journal of Education for Business 1 0.8
Peabody Journal of Education 1 0.8
Roeper Review 1 0.8
Russian Education and Society 1 0.8
School Leadership and Management 1 0.8
The Anthropologist 1 0.8
Elsevier 20 15
Studies in Educational Evaluation 8 6
Procedia –Social and Behavioral Sciences 4 3
Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences 2 1.5
International Journal of Educational Development 2 1.5
Evaluation and Program Planning 1 0.8
Journal of Comparative Economics 1 0.8
Journal of Operations Management 1 0.8
Learning and Instruction 1 0.8
Sage 19 14.3
Research in Comparative and International Education 4 3
SAGE Open 4 3
Educational Management Administration and Leadership 3 2.3
Education and Urban Society 1 0.8
Educational Administration Quarterly 1 0.8
Educational Policy 1 0.8
International Journal of Educational Reform 1 0.8
(continued )
Table 3.
List of journals
considered in the study
TQM

secondary education belong to publishers such as Emerald and Taylor and Francis, while the
majority of the published articles (59.4%) are also included in the databases of these
publishers. Many journals (67.7%) published only one article of the sample. The publishing
journals cited are from various scientific backgrounds and they are not limited to journals
with quality and/or educational subjects. Emerald is an academic database that includes
36.1% of the sample articles which were published in 12 journals. Taking into consideration
the number of the journals in Emerald which have published articles with regard to QM in
primary and secondary education, the Pareto principle 80/20 is approximately reflected. This
means that a “vital few”journals of Emerald (2 out of 12) have published the majority of the
QM articles (62.5%), whereas the “useful many”journals (10 out of 12) have published the
minority of the sample articles (37.5%). Similarly, the Pareto principle (in terms of journals
and published articles) is reflected in the SLR studies of Manatos et al. (2017) and Prakash
(2018) in HE, while it is not reflected in the study of Tan et al. (2016) in HE. Given that the
Quality Assurance in Education Journal and the International Journal of Educational
Management published almost 22.5% of the whole sample of the articles included in the
present review, it is apparent that these two journals are the most influential journals in the
field of QM in primary and secondary education. Thus, authors wishing to conduct future
literature review studies in this field should base them firstly on these journals. These two
journals also rank among the journals with the highest number of articles in the SLR study of
Prakash (2018) in the field of quality in HE.
It was found that 255 authors contributed to the 133 articles. The high number of the
authors who contributed to the publication of the sample articles, confirms the increased
academic interest in the field of QM in primary and secondary education (Figure 1). Most
articles were published by a single author (35.5%), followed by those published under the co-
authorship of two and three authors (31.6% and 20.3% respectively). Co-authorship of more
than four authors was not frequent (12.8%).The highest number of authors contributing to one
multinational research study was seven and was observed in the article of L
opez et al. (2019).
The reviewed articles were published between 1983 and 2019 (Figure 2). The oldest
relevant article found was that of Kelly and Lassa (1983). The quality of learning in Nigerian
primary education was discussed in this old article. Publications stagnated between 1983 and
2004, being few in number. They started to increase in 2006 but fell in number again in 2009.
The decrease in the number of published articles during the years 2009 and 2010 may be
attributable to the financial crisis which might distracted researchers’attention away from
studying QM in education. However, an increase in research was noticeable at the beginning
Publisher –Journals Number of articles %
Journal of Education for Sustainable Development 1 0.8
Policy Futures in Education 1 0.8
Social Science Computer Review 1 0.8
The Journal of Applied Economic Research 1 0.8
Springer 12 9
International Review of Education 6 4.5
Educational Research for Policy and Practice 3 2.3
Asia Pacific Education Review 1 0.8
Frontiers of Education in China 1 0.8
The Urban Review 1 0.8
Wiley 3 2.3
Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs 1 0.8
Educational Philosophy and Theory 1 0.8
IDS Introductory and Development Studies, Practice Papers 1 0.8 Table 3.
Findings of
QM studies in
education

of 2012. Specifically, 38.4% of the sample articles were published up to the end of 2011, while
more than half (61.6%) were published between 2012 and 2019, in other words, within the last
decade. This diachronic increase verifies the academic community’s interest in studying QM
implementation in education (Soria-Garcia and Martinez-Lorente, 2014;Fern
andez-Diaz et al.,
2016). It is worth noting that Tan et al. (2016),Manatos et al. (2017) and Prakash (2018)
reviewing the literature in the field of QM in HE as well as Psomas et al. (2019) reviewing the
literature in the field of QM in primary and secondary education, observed, similar to the
present SLR, an increase in the number of published articles with the passing of time.
Regarding educational level, many sample articles (25.6%) focus on both primary and
secondary schools, while 21% focus only on primary schools and 24.1% only on secondary
schools (Figure 3). A percentage of 20.3% of the sample articles did not address educational
level but referred generally to the education system (such as those of Cuttance, 1994;
Knipprath and Arimoto, 2007;Peter and Brockling, 2017;Suominen et al., 2017). In addition,
some articles which are included in the category “other,”studied simultaneously institutions
from different educational levels meaning higher, secondary, primary, vocational or technical
education (Yoshida, 1994;Thonhauser and Passmore, 2006;Thonhauser, 2008;Biltagy, 2012;
Sarrico and Rosa, 2016;LeMahieu et al., 2017). It is apparent from the present SLR that almost
111
333
1
3
2
11
3
1
4
88
5
2
4
10
9
88
10
12
3
18
1author
35.3%
2authors
31.6%
3authors
20.3%
> 5 authors
3%
4 authors
9.8%
Figure 2.
Articles per
publication year
Figure 1.
Authorships of the
sample articles
TQM

equal percentages of QM studies were devoted to the whole education system, both primary
and secondary education, primary education only and secondary education only. This means
that the study of QM in the first levels of education, meaning primary and secondary, has
been considered in the context of an individual education level and an aggregate level as well.
The same is also observed in the SLR study of Psomas et al. (2019) identifying the future
research agenda of QM in primary and secondary education.
The empirical research approach was the most common research design applied in the
reviewed studies (87 articles, 65.4%) (Figure 4). In most of them, the research instrument
applied to gather data from respondents (headmasters, teachers, pupils, parents) was the
structured questionnaire. In twenty-two of the reviewed articles (16.5%), the single or
multiple case study approach was applied. The remaining articles present conceptual studies
(18 articles, 13.5%), literature reviews (1 article, 0.8%), general reviews (3 articles, 2.3%) and
viewpoints (2 articles, 1.5%).
It can be seen that conceptual articles were the most commonly published (50%) during
the first years of the period considered in the present study, meaning between 1983 and 2000
34
28
32
27
12
primary and
secondary schools
primary school secondary schools not spesified other
(25.6%)
(21%)
(24.1%)
(20.3%)
(9%)
Case study Literature
review
Conceptual
paper
Research
paper
General
review
Viewpoint
22
1
18
87
32
(16.5%)
(0.8%)
(13.5%)
(65.4%)
(2.3%) (1.5%)
Figure 3.
Articles per school type
Figure 4.
Article type
Findings of
QM studies in
education

(Table 4). However, most of the later articles (published in 2011–2019) used research (86.6%)
as the method to study QM in primary and secondary education. The case study approach
remained popular until 2010, while the interest of the researchers in using this method in the
later years declined. It seems that, firstly, the early published conceptual articles setting the
theoretical concerns and foundations for QM in education, and secondly, the dearth of
empirical research studies in the early years of the period considered in the present SLR,
resulted in the increase in the research articles in the later years of this literature review
period. The ratio of empirical/conceptual articles, which in the later years of the review period
considered in the present SLR is in favor of the empirical articles, was also observed in the
SLR study of Prakash (2018) in HE. By contrast, in the SLR study of Manatos et al. (2017) in
HE, the conceptual-theoretical articles constitute the majority of the sample articles reviewed,
followed by surveys and case studies. Finally, it can be highlighted that only one literature
review study (Suominen et al., 2017) and three general reviews (Dora, 2007;Odhiambo, 2008;
Bunyi, 2013) were conducted and those were mostly in the last years of the review period
considered in the present study.
Considering the school itself as the research unit, the samples of the empirical surveys
described in the reviewed articles were small. By contrast, when it came to surveying many
stakeholders per school including headmasters, teachers, pupils, parents, etc., the research
samples were large. A percentage of 35.6% (31 articles) of the empirical surveys (87)
described in the sample articles are based on small research samples (<100 participants),
while a percentage of 36.8% (32 articles) are based on a large research sample (>500
participants) (Figure 5). For example, in the study by Ploom and Haldma (2013),
Years
Case
study
Literature
review
Conceptual
paper
Research
paper
General
review Viewpoint Total
1983–
2000
6 (33.3%) 0 (0%) 9 (50%) 3 (16.7%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 18 (100%)
2001–
2010
10 (30.3%) 0 (0%) 7 (21.2%) 13 (39.4%) 2 (6.1%) 1 (3%) 33 (100%)
2011–
2019
6 (7.4%) 1 (1.2%) 2 (2.4%) 71 (86.6%) 1 (1.2%) 1 (1.2%) 82 (100%)
Total 22 (16.5%) 1 (0.6%) 18 (13.5%) 87 (65.4%) 3 (2.5%) 2 (1.5%) 133 (100%)
1-100 101-200 201-300 301-400 401-500 >501
31
6864
32
(4.6%)
(35.6%)
(6.9%) (9.2%) (6. 9%)
(36.8%)
Table 4.
Article type per time
interval
Figure 5.
Survey studies per
sample of participants
TQM

119 headmasters, 1,251 teachers, 4,118 pupils and 1,244 parents from 164 different schools
participated. A comparative study by Othman and Muijs (2013) also contains a large amount
of quantitative data (1,183 teachers from 63 rural schools and 1,367 teachers from 60 urban
schools). So, in the present SLR, both small and large sized research samples were used in the
survey articles. In the SLR study of Psomas et al. (2019) in the field of QM in primary and
secondary education, many survey articles used small samples of schools, similar to the
present study.
In Table 5, the origin of the studies is presented. Each study originated from one country
with a maximum of 47 countries, depending on the sample. The studies described in the
sample articles were conducted in more than 50 countries on 6 continents. More specifically,
44 studies were conducted in Europe, 36 in Asia, 25 in Africa, 9 in North and South America
and 5 in Australia. It is surprising that North and South America is not among the top
continents where the QM studies were conducted. In the SLR study of Psomas et al. (2019) in
the field of QM in primary and secondary education, the majority of studies were also
conducted in Europe, Asia and Africa, similar to the present study. Some studies (12) contain
samples from more than one country, whereas in two studies no originating country was
determined. The majority of the studies (44) drew samples from European countries and more
specifically, 7 studies collected data from the United Kingdom, 10 from Spain, followed by
Greece (8), the Netherlands (5) and Sweden (3). Estonia and Germany are each the country of
origin of two studies. The rest of the European countries (Portugal, Denmark, Finland,
Cyprus, Slovenia, North Cyprus and Ireland) accounted for 1 study.
3.2 Themes of findings of the QM studies in primary and secondary education
Table 6 presents the themes of the 457 findings in the field of QM in primary and secondary
education. These findings which were revealed from the 133 reviewed articles were grouped
into 43 themes through the affinity diagram. Thus, a significant number of themes of findings
of QM studies were revealed and cover a wide range of contents. Each theme is supported by
a number of references. The findings of QM studies in primary and secondary education
which are grouped in a specific theme are highly inter-related. This confirms the
unidimensionality of each theme and the discrimination between it and the others.
The 43 themes were further categorized, based on their affinity into broader categories,
namely “management practices,”“school characteristics,”“stakeholders (headmasters,
parents, local community),”“government,”“teachers”and “pupils”(Table 6,Figure 6). The
first category, namely “management practices”consists of 15 themes (including 176 findings).
It refers to the use of management methods, techniques and approaches which focus on
multilevel and multidimensional school quality improvement. The second category, namely
“school characteristics”consists of 10 themes (including 76 findings). It describes structural
issues (infrastructure, pupil/teacher ratio, safety), the educational process (curriculum
content, quality of education), or school culture. The third category, namely “stakeholders”
Geographical area Number of studies %
Europe 44 33.6
Asia 36 27.5
Africa 25 19
North and South America 9 6.9
Australia 5 3.8
Multinational 12 9.2
Total 131 100
Table 5.
Geographic
research areas
Findings of
QM studies in
education

Themes Supporting references
No.
Findings
Management practices (15 themes) 176
Headmasters’
leadership (1)
1,2,16*,17,26,30,31**,39,42,43,44,55,57,60,64,
70,71,81,88,97*,103,106,119,123,132,139
30
QMS & quality
assurance (2)
8,27*,34,39*,41,45,46,47,49,50,57,59*,73,86,95,
116,117,118,123*,128,133**,140,141
29
TQM applicability in
education (3)
16,33*,40,71,73,74,85*,92,94*,97,98,126,128,132, 142,147,151 20
Self- assessment &
inspection (4)
18**,28,31,36,55,56,58,59,71,78,86,109,111,124,
133,134,150
19
Staff implementing QM
(5)
27,39,40,55,57*,67,74,94,110,123,132*,142*,149 16
Change management (6) 4,16,27,34,47,71,74,77,81,98,110,115,119,130,132,142 16
Use of standards and
data (7)
2,6,8,20,22,27,33,49,55,72,73,89,95,111,142,149 16
Quality models and
excellence (8)
1,7,34,40,51,88,96,107,111 9
Teamwork (9) 2,30,94,111,132,147 6
School continuous
improvement (10)
27,36,70,81 4
Accountability (11) 19,96,98 3
Strategic quality
planning (12)
36,97,131 3
Lean philosophy (13) 76,125,129, 3
Management by
objectives (14)
77 1
Supply chain
management (15)
122 1
School characteristics (10 themes) 76
School performance &
quality of education (16)
8,11,12,15,19,20,29,30,31,32,41,42,44,62,84,89,94,100,102,104,108,109,138,152 24
Curriculum content (17) 3,23,26,27,32,48,62,65,66,75,86,89,90*,110,142,149 17
Instructional materials/
educational
infrastructure (18)
3,10*,11,19,61,90*,94,100,123,146,149 13
School/classroom
climate and culture (19)
6,12,38,47,67,71,79,104 8
Special education (20) 36,48,85,105 4
Pupil/teacher ratio (21) 121,145 2
Classroom quality (22) 139,146 2
School Safety (23) 3,129 2
Learning organization
(24)
59,71 2
School type (25) 34,45 2
Stakeholders (headmasters, parents, local community) (4 themes) 62
Relationship and
collaboration among
stakeholders (26)
1,12,26,27,33*,46**,47,66,68,71*,75,80,81,94,119*122,123,134,147,149,151 26
Differences between
stakeholders’
perceptions (27)
12,27,34,35,41,45,71,105,109,110, 117,118,123,142 14
Stakeholders’
satisfaction (28)
16,39,40,42,49,73,90,94,108*,119,132,133 13
Parental involvement
(29)
3,43*,68,71,72*,81,128 9
(continued )
Table 6.
Themes of findings of
the QM studies in
primary and secondary
education
TQM

consists of 4 themes (including 62 findings). It depicts the perceptions of headmasters,
parents or local community, their satisfaction from the school services, their involvement in
school events and the collaboration among these parties. The “government”category is a
synthesis of 4 themes (including 55 findings) which mainly refer to the national policy about
education, the level of school autonomy and the quantity of the provided resources. The fifth
category, namely “teachers”consists of 6 themes (including 54 findings) focusing on teachers’
personal development, performance, or job-related issues (salary, workload) which affect
their job satisfaction. The sixth category, namely “pupils”consists of 4 themes (including 34
findings) which refer mainly to students’performance and their school completion rates.
Taking into consideration the themes of findings revealed, it is apparent that a conceptual
first order underlying structure of the findings of the QM studies in primary and secondary
education is formulated. Moreover, the further classification of these themes into broad
categories means that a conceptual second order underlying structure of the themes of
findings is formulated. The pillars of this structure are the following: the “management
practices,”“school characteristics,”“stakeholders (headmasters, parents, local community),”
“government,”“teachers”and “pupils.”These broad categories of the themes of findings of
the QM studies, concern both the internal and external school environment. The richer
categories in terms of the number of respective themes and findings of the QM studies are the
“management practices”and “school characteristics”and concern the internal school
environment. It is worth noting that the broad categories of themes concerning the internal
school environment namely “teachers”and “pupils”are not so rich in terms of the number of
respective themes and findings of the QM studies. This means that these categories have been
neglected by authors.
Themes Supporting references
No.
Findings
Government (4 themes) 55
Government role (30) 10,35,44,52,56,60,62,66,69,75,87,88*,89,90,99,100,107,119,121,127,128,149* 24
Policy of
decentralization (31)
23,30,32,43,44,52,53*,60,68,69,88,90,96**,108,119133,149 20
Educational funding
(32)
14,46,66,90,107,123,127,128,134,149 10
Role of media (33) 8 1
Teachers (6 themes) 54
Teaching methodology /
output (34)
6,14,20,26,27,31,33*,37,58,65,75,80,81,92,93,98,
146,149
19
Teacher professional
development (35)
2,19,26,31,37,43,63,64*,68,70,71,83,100,104,105, 106,149 18
Teacher performance
(36)
78,83,100,109,115,133,147 7
Workload of teachers
(37)
47,57,70,74,123,145 6
Teachers’salary (38) 62,63,123 3
Job satisfaction (39) 120 1
Pupils (4 themes) 34
Pupil performance (40) 3,14,32,33*,62,75,77,90,100,106,108,133*,150 15
School dropout (41) 11,14,15**,19,54,99,127,145,147 11
Pupil orientation (42) 20,29,35,65,115,138,146 7
Individual earnings (43) 73 1
Note(s): (I)QMS: (Integrated) Quality Management System, ESD: Education for Sustainable Development,
SBMC: school-based management committee
*The paper includes two findings in the theme, **the paper includes three findings in the theme Table 6.
Findings of
QM studies in
education

Figure 6: Affinity diagram of themes
Management practices School characteristics Stakeholders Government Teachers Pupils
Headmasters' leadership School performance &
quality of education
Relationship-collaboration
among stakeholders
Government role Teaching methodology
/ output
Pupil performance
QMS & quality assurance Curriculum content Stakeholders' satisfaction Policy of
decentralization
Teacher professional
development
School dropout
TQM applicability in
education
Instructional materials/
educational infrastructure
Differences between
stakeholders’ perceptions
Educational funding Teacher performan ce Pupil orientation
Staff implementing QM School/class-room climate
and culture
Parental involvement Role of media Workload of teachers Individual earnings
Self- assessment &
inspection
Special education Teachers’ salary
Change management Pupil/teacher ratio Job satisfaction
Use of standards and data Classroom quality
Quality models and
excellence
School Safety
Teamwork Learning organization
School continuous
improvement
School type
Accountability
Strategic quality planning
Lean philosophy
Management by objectives
Supply chain management
Figure 6.
Affinity diagram of
themes
TQM

In order to further analyze and prioritize the themes, a Pareto diagram was applied based on
the number of study findings per theme (Figure 7). The Pareto diagram illustrates that 20 out
of the 43 themes (46.5%) account for the percentage of 81% of the findings of the QM studies
in primary and secondary education. These themes are the following: headmasters’
leadership, QMS & quality assurance, relationship and collaboration among stakeholders,
school performance & quality of education, government role, TQM applicability in education,
policy of decentralization, self-assessment & inspection, teaching methodology/output,
teacher professional development, curriculum content, staff implementing QM, change
management, use of standards and data, pupil performance, differences between
stakeholders’perceptions, instructional materials/educational infrastructure, stakeholders’
satisfaction, school dropout, and educational funding. The remaining 23 themes (53.5%)
account for the percentage of 19% of the findings of the QM studies in primary and secondary
education. Thus, neither “vital few”themes of findings of the QM studies in primary and
secondary education can be identified nor “useful many”themes. In other words, the Pareto
principle 80/20, according to which a percentage of 20% of the themes would account for the
percentage of 80% of the findings of the QM studies in primary and secondary education, is
not applied. However, given that the Pareto diagram does illustrate a percentage of 46.5% of
the themes that account for 81% of the findings of the QM studies, these themes can be
considered as “vital,”while the remaining themes (53.5%, which account for 19% of the
findings) can be considered as “useful.”All broad categories of the themes are represented in
the team of themes, namely “vital.”From the above analysis, a clear distinction and
prioritization is apparent between the “vital”themes and the “useful”ones.
According to the literature, the potential benefits of QM in educational institutions have
risen. The present SLR shows that QM can help a school provide better services to pupils and
the community in general. The implementation of QM practices in education increases both
pupils’performance and school efficiency in operation. It is worth noting that the relationship
between QM implementation and school performance has been analyzed using a variety of
methods and variables. More frequently, school performance is measured by students’
examination results, rather than acknowledging and evaluating school operational efficiency
and effectiveness in managing its resources (Ploom and Haldma, 2013;Diaz and Martinez-
Mediano, 2018). However, schools in which pupils’test scores are excellent do not necessarily
perform well in other factors such as leadership, human resource management, knowledge
management and strategic planning (Othman and Rauf, 2009;Yoo, 2019). So, the
Figure 7.
Pareto diagram
Findings of
QM studies in
education

development of these factors should be prioritized and evaluated in the school unit not only
by those managing schools but also by the teachers and all the stakeholders in general.
3.3 Findings’presentation of research studies
This section presents analytically per theme, the main findings of those studies describing
research (73 articles). In so doing, a more descriptive picture is provided with regard to the
empirical findings of the QM studies in primary and secondary education.
3.3.1 Management practices. 3.3.1.1 Headmasters’leadership. School leaders or Board of
Governors play a critical role in influencing school outcomes (Ah-Teck and Starr, 2013;Hooge
and Honingh, 2014) and improvement (Makoelle, 2014), but the cultural transformation may
not happen without top down total involvement (Sulaiman et al., 2013). Schools need scientific
and democratic administration (Ngware et al., 2006;Jiayi and Ying, 2009). Thus, the selection
process of school leaders should be improved (Chua and Mosha, 2015). They may lack
interpersonal skills (Pansiri, 2008). Elahi and Ilyas (2019) found that there is no difference
between a school principal having professional degree or not, in terms of the effect of process
management he/she applies on academic and fictional quality of schools. Some researchers
agree that transformational leadership is needed in schools (Konidari and Abernot, 2006;
Othman and Muijs, 2013;Gustafsson et al., 2015), whereas, according to Ko et al. (2012), the
leadership practice that contribute to sustained school improvement does not include
dimensions associated with transformational leadership or instructional leadership. The
creative leadership practice is significantly related to classroom quality (Thawinkarn et al.,
2018). School management should be committed to quality management principles (Diaz and
Martinez-Mediano, 2018), ensure a uniform implementation of an integrated QMS (Sebola and
Malema, 2014), promote school self-evaluation (Bija et al., 2016) and introduce quality
assurance practices (Ngware et al., 2006;Ezenwaji et al., 2019). Hierarchical structures of
schools impose severe threats to effectively implement an integrated QMS (Hlongwane and
Mestry, 2013). Alongside the core systemic qualities of TQM, there are moral and cultural
dimensions of leadership which could enhance the teaching and learning improvement (Ah-
Teck and Starr, 2014). Strong humanity leadership and explicit emphasis on school
development priorities underpin high-quality primary education (Catling, 2017).
3.3.1.2 QMS and quality assurance. ISO QMS can be implemented in education institutions
successfully and have a positive impact on school development and performance
(Thonhauser and Passmore, 2006;Hofman et al., 2008;Galvez et al., 2016;Cruz et al., 2016;
Fernandez-Diaz et al., 2017;Rodr

ıguez-Mantilla et al., 2018;Rodr

ıguez-Mantilla et al., 2019a,b;
Fern
andez-Cruz et al., 2019). The longer a QMS has been in place, the greater its impact on
various areas (Fernandez-Diaz et al., 2016). Many researchers proposed QM features or
dimensions in education (Hofman et al., 2008;Cheng and Yau, 2011;Soria-Garcia and
Mart

ınez-Lorente, 2014). Factors such as school and student backgrounds, school tradition,
etc. affect QM with regard to school management effectiveness (Cheng and Yau, 2011;Sebola
and Malema, 2014). Drawbacks (such as bureaucratic workloads or top-down management
culture) or difficulties (such as limited knowledge on integrated QMS and lack of sufficient
personnel in schools) to effectively implement QM have also been noticed (Hlongwane and
Mestry, 2013;Sebola and Malema, 2014;Diaz and Martinez-Mediano, 2018). The ISO QMS
implementation is time consuming and several factors are related to the time needed for the
ISO 9001 certification; education institutions registered to ISO 9001 in an average time of
16.50 months (Thonhauser, 2008).
3.3.1.3 TQM applicability in education. The principles of TQM are appropriate for
educational settings (Nawelwa et al., 2015). However, some researchers expressed their
reserves towards TQM implementation in education (Konidari and Abernot, 2006) and
pointed that there is a need to accommodate change (Toremen et al., 2009). TQM promotes
school effectiveness (Nawelwa et al., 2015) and school success in terms of its mission, goal and
TQM

objectives (Ngware et al., 2006). TQM as a management tool in classroom practice enhances
accountability, collective decision-making, communication and quality of discipline
(Ngwenya, 2013). The involvement in a TQM journey requires a systemic approach (Soria-
Garcia and Mart

ınez-Lorente, 2014). The strongest driving force toward TQM is teamwork
while the strongest restraining force is lack of knowledge of TQM principles and its
associated tools (Sulaiman et al., 2013). Sfakianaki (2019) proposed a 7-dimensioned and a 66-
itemed instrument to measure TQM implementation in education.
3.3.1.4 Staff implement QM. Teachers are reluctant to take up quality work (Cheng and
Yau, 2011) and feel pressed to achieve perfection (Kiremitci et al., 2014). Training on quality
system (Toremen et al., 2009;Pourrajab et al., 2015;Diaz and Martinez-Mediano, 2018) and
participation in the quality project (Sulaiman et al., 2013) are necessary because of teachers’
limited knowledge (Sebola and Malema, 2014). An effective in-service training for managers
and staff would probably reduce their resistance and empower them to take direct action
(Toremen et al., 2009;Hlongwane and Mestry, 2013;Nawelwa et al., 2015). Capacity building
actions have a strong relationship with improvement actions for school effectiveness
(Gustafsson et al., 2015). Employee involvement to improve quality is considered as the
second most important issue related to TQM initiative efforts (Sulaiman et al., 2013). Teachers
indicated that the school hierarchy threatened them to perform their responsibilities
(Hlongwane and Mestry, 2013).
3.3.1.5 Self-assessment and inspection. Inspection and systematic self-evaluation should
not be limited to their role of control, but they should constitute an excellent formative
evaluation (Konidari and Abernot, 2006). They primarily drive change, encouraging certain
developmental processes (Powell, 2000;Gustafsson et al., 2015). Innovative schools differ
significantly on the aspects that the inspectorate uses to assess the quality of a school
(Hofman et al., 2012). Attention is needed for a balance between internal and external
supervision (Bija et al., 2016). Schools with advanced QMS more often accept the standards
and the criteria that the inspectorate uses (Hofman et al., 2008). Frequently, organizations
start self-assessment without sufficiently thinking of “why”and “how”to accomplish this
project (Svensson and Klefsjo, 2006). The quality of school self-evaluation depends on the
quality of the instruments and process factors (Bija et al., 2016). For this reason, frameworks
for school self-evaluation have been formulated (Senol and Dagli, 2016;Bija et al., 2016;Chen
et al., 2019). Schools filling out a self-assessment form have made positive changes on their
weaknesses (Harma, 2019). The frequency of conducting self-evaluation is affected by the
opinion of head teachers, teachers, and school counselors regarding the positive effects of self-
evaluation; the school climate; the attitude of head teachers, teachers and school counselors
toward research and their own professional development (Podgornik and Vogrinc, 2017). Τo
enter a self-assessment project, the coworkers should participate (Svensson and Klefsjo,
2006). Schools should institute their own mechanisms for ensuring that there is timely and
effective feedback to both students and teachers from applying a self-assessment project
(Chua and Mosha, 2015;Liu et al., 2019;Yoo, 2019).
3.3.1.6 Change management. There is a need for an effective change management that
makes all the stakeholders adopt the new practices with regard to QM (Makoelle, 2014).
Driven through a TQM philosophy or a QMS or adopting organizational learning or lean
approaches, are cases of significant changes (Toremen et al., 2009;Cheng and Yau, 2011;
Ngwenya, 2013;Cruz et al., 2016;LeMahieu et al., 2017). Confidence in the status quo,
suspicion or inability to change are important factors determining the resistance to change
(Sulaiman et al., 2013;Pourrajab et al., 2015). To assess the changes, it is necessary to remove
barriers (Al-Alawi et al., 2019) and apply methodologies that allow collecting information at
all stages (Fernandez-Diaz et al., 2017).
3.3.1.7 Use of standards and data. TQM is a management tool that emphasizes the means
of performance measurement and feedback (Cheng and Yau, 2011). Ah-Teck and Starr (2014)
Findings of
QM studies in
education

pointed a lack of “data culture”in schools and the need for a balance between a quantitative
data culture and a qualitative view. A commitment to data driven decision-making is key for
the improvement of processes (Powell, 2000). Despite a generally positive attitude to the
usefulness of data and the skills learned, teachers and school leaders did not appear
convinced that they could be involved in data use on an ongoing basis (Brien et al., 2019). The
framing of data plays a significant role when attention is also paid to “soft”quality indicators
(Kool and Bekkers, 2015). Educational authorities are attempting to impose quality standards
which may vary according to the teacher personality (Amzat, 2017). As teachers’levels of
education rise, they develop higher standards and have higher levels of expectation (Toremen
et al., 2009). Clear standards have an impact on the increased utilization of schools self-
evaluation (Gustafsson et al., 2015).
3.3.1.8 Quality models and excellence. Many schools work based on the EFQM excellence
model (Cruz et al., 2016). This model constitutes one of the most important and controversial
option for the quality management and evaluation (Anastasiadou et al., 2014). On the other
hand, Ah-Teck and Starr (2013) confirmed empirically the usefulness of the MBNQA
excellence model. School excellence models engage schools in self-improvement and self-
assessment exercises (Powell, 2000).
3.3.1.9 Teamwork. Team involvement is essential in the implementation of TQM in
schools, empowering workers to take the initiative to improve the processes and quality
(Sulaiman et al., 2013;Nawelwa et al., 2015), enhancing communication flows and focusing on
a data-driven decision-making (Powell, 2000;Ah-Teck and Starr, 2014). Quality performance
of groups is expected to be very important and necessary in teaching and daily work to
enhance students’learning (Cheng and Cheung, 2004).
3.3.2 School characteristics. 3.3.2.1 School performance and quality of education. The
performances of the school, groups and individual teachers among the different types of self-
management are significantly different (Cheng and Cheung, 2004). School performance
indexes should be based on a variety of dimensions (Othman and Rauf, 2009;Babalis et al.,
2012;Ploom and Haldma, 2013;Taut and Rakoczy, 2016). School performance should be
developed at the level of the professional autonomy of schools and individual teachers
(Podgornik and Vogrinc, 2017). Process approach has a significant effect on functional
quality and academic quality of schools (Elahi and Ilyas, 2019). Quality education is defined
by several dimensions that are not of equal importance, but are rather interrelated (Ibrahim
et al., 2017), such as curriculum content, instructional materials and equipment, school culture
and so on (Cravens et al., 2011;Nawelwa et al., 2015). Quality of education is influenced by
many external factors such as background, economic circumstances, poverty (Biltagy, 2012;
Mayne, 2014) or a quota admission policy (Zhang et al., 2019). It provides students with the
knowledge needed to solve problems and actively contributes to the development of societies
(Ezenwaji et al., 2019).
3.3.2.2 Curriculum content. Kabouridis and Link (2001) propose a list of guidelines for the
design of short courses focusing on adults (such as the identification of the participants’needs
and motives, the usage of the appropriate educational environment and modern educational
aids). The content of the curriculum should be well-balanced, more vocational (Toremen et al.,
2009;Albaker, 2017), school-based (Mosha, 1988;Cheng and Yau, 2011;Cravens et al., 2011)
and with well-oriented content (Laurie et al., 2016;Catling, 2017). It should motivate students
intrinsically to do and be the best (Pourrajab et al., 2015), providing them with the “right”
knowledge (Ibrahim et al., 2017).
3.3.2.3 Instructional materials/educational infrastructure. The learning environment in
some areas is poor because of inadequate funding, lack of periodic monitoring and
maintenance of school (Asaaju, 2012). School infrastructure is related to quality of education
(Biltagy, 2012;Asaaju, 2012). Student engagement in learning activities is high when
organizational and instructional supports are high in the classroom (Virtanen et al., 2015). The
TQM

lack of physical infrastructure affects also the integrated QMS implementation in a negative
manner (Sebola and Malema, 2014). There is a need for providing teaching and learning
materials adequately in schools (Nawelwa et al., 2015), since they play a significant role in the
level of learning (Kabouridis and Link, 2001). Available technology is used inconsistently
sometimes (Albaker, 2017).
3.3.2.4 School/classroom climate and culture. The school culture should engage all
stakeholders in defining the organization goals (Konidari and Abernot, 2006). Detert et al.
(2003) proposed a survey instrument for measuring the culture of QM (including elements
such as shared vision, data-based decision-making, teacher involvement and customer focus).
Implementing a QM for more than six years also influences a school’s climate (Fernandez-
Diaz et al., 2017). School quality management culture and teachers’behavior enhance
continuous development as well as the intensity of reforms (Kiremitci et al., 2014). Rural
teachers perceive lower levels of school climate (Othman and Muijs, 2013). A calm atmosphere
in the classroom leads to more positive emotional outcomes of students (Babalis et al., 2012).
Although there is officially a national school climate policy, performatively there are at least
two school climate realities in schools (accountability logic of efficiency and school
improvement and community involvement), stemming from very different actors, logics and
discourses (L
opez et al., 2019). There is a weak relationship between the pedagogical content
knowledge and the classroom management style (Amzat, 2017).
3.3.3 Stakeholders. 3.3.3.1 Relationship and collaboration among stakeholders. Emphasis
is pointed to the good relationship between school leaders and staff (Cheng and Yau, 2011),
students and teachers (Babalis et al., 2012;Catling, 2017), as well as schools and universities in
a“supplier”and “customer”partnership perspective (Sarrico and Rosa, 2016). The goal of the
school-based management committee is to increase the participation of parents and
communities in school issues (Ezenwaji et al., 2019). There is a need for an open
communication system between the school and all the social agents (Fernandez-Diaz et al.,
2016) and among different school managerial levels (Konidari and Abernot, 2006;Fernandez-
Diaz et al., 2016). Communication is also important to establish a self-assessment project in the
school (Svensson and Klefsjo, 2006). Collaboration is needed among all stakeholders for
school improvement (Makoelle, 2014) and more specifically collaboration which is
characterized by more participatory decision-making for an effective change to be
achieved (Ah-Teck and Starr, 2014). There should be collaborative work between teachers
and principals as far as students’performance and punishments are concerned (Konidari and
Abernot, 2006). Schools implementing QMS (Fernandez-Diaz et al., 2017) or Education for
Sustainable Development have better relationship with stakeholders (Laurie et al., 2016) and
can improve the communication and collaboration with them (Nawelwa et al., 2015;
Fernandez-Diaz et al., 2016). On the other hand, the successful implementation of an
integrated QMS depends on full cooperation among stakeholders (Sebola and Malema, 2014).
3.3.3.2 Stakeholder satisfaction. Educational organizations have a diverse range of
customers with conflicting expectations (Ploom and Haldma, 2013). These organizations need
to meet all stakeholders’needs (Diaz and Martinez-Mediano, 2018). Stakeholders’satisfaction
is influenced by the school’s strategic and operational performance (Ploom and Haldma,
2013). Teachers should identify their customers and satisfy their needs (Nawelwa et al., 2015),
while most educators rather modify than satisfy their customers’needs (Sulaiman et al., 2013).
Customer focus medicates the relationship between process approach and functional quality
(Elahi and Ilyas, 2019).
3.3.3.3 Differences between stakeholders’perceptions. In some cases, school
administrators are ignorant about TQM and none of the teachers and school
administrators have previously heard about the concept of quality tools (Ozberk et al.,
2019). Moreover, there are significant differences among teachers’perceptions on TQM
practices depending upon the variables of branch, level of education and tenure, while there
Findings of
QM studies in
education

are no meaningful differences according to the gender variable (Toremen et al., 2009). What
makes school child friendly differ according to stakeholders perspectives (Cunningham,
2012). Cruz et al. (2016) found that both managers and teachers valued, at a similar level, the
impact of the quality management plans. Other researchers noticed that there is no alignment
between teachers and principals’perceptions concerning QM (Fern
andez-Cruz et al., 2019;
Cheng and Yau, 2011;Sebola and Malema, 2014), learning organization features (Konidari
and Abernot, 2006), self-evaluation importance (Podgornik and Vogrinc, 2017), school
effectiveness (Babalis et al., 2012) or ISO 9001 impact (Rodr

ıguez-Mantilla et al., 2019a and b).
Except for the position conditioned, the gender and the years of seniority at the school
influence the perception of teachers and managers about the impact of QMS (Rodr

ıguez-
Mantilla et al., 2018) and the resistance to change (Pourrajab et al., 2015).
3.3.3.4 Parental involvement. It was supported an absence of strong relationships between
teachers and parents (Konidari and Abernot, 2006). Parental involvement is limited (Albaker,
2017) but important in creating a conducive atmosphere for school improvement (Makoelle,
2014) and a better education (Soria-Garcia and Mart

ınez-Lorente, 2014).
3.3.4 Government. 3.3.4.1 Government role. The policy-making process involves
unnecessary haste, which does not allow adequate time for reflection and rational decision-
making (Mosha, 1988). An education system is relevant for the accomplishment of individual
goals and national development (Ibrahim et al., 2017); so it attracts governance interest (Hooge
and Honingh, 2014;Soria-Garcia and Mart

ınez-Lorente, 2014). Political stability and countries’
economic circumstances play a significant role in the education quality (Nir and Kafle, 2013).
Governments through their policies attempt to reform the educational system (Asaaju, 2012;
Cunningham, 2012;Laurie et al., 2016;Ezenwaji et al., 2019;Harma, 2019).
3.3.4.2 Policy of decentralization. Introducing a policy of decentralization, schools could
have more authority and autonomy, adaptability and the capacity to design their own
curricula within a national expectations framework (Cheng and Cheung, 2004;Cravens et al.,
2011;Ploom and Haldma, 2013;Hooge and Honingh, 2014). Decentralization has also a
positive effect on students’access to the education system (Guerra and Lastra-Anadon, 2019).
Sub-central governments are more incentivized than national ones to pursue policy
improvements (Guerra and Lastra-Anadon, 2019). The school-based management committee
empowers principals and teachers, builds local level capacity, encourages shared decision-
making, and improves efficiency of schooling (Ezenwaji et al., 2019).
3.3.4.3 Educational funding. The quality in education does not only depend on the
quantity of resources, but also on how the resources are used (Soria-Garcia and Mart

ınez-
Lorente, 2014). To develop a self-assessment project (Svensson and Klefsjo, 2006)oran
Integrated QMS (Sebola and Malema, 2014) resources are important. On the other hand, there
has been an increase in the use of community resources by schools implementing QMS
(Fern
andez-Diaz et al., 2016).
3.3.5 Teachers. 3.3.5.1 Teaching methodology/output. High quality of teaching/learning
process does not guarantee high education outcomes (Hofman et al., 2012). Musundire and
Dreyer (2019) supported the effectiveness of the clinical supervision strategy as a tool for
improving the quality of teaching, in compliance with the TQM principle of empowerment
which is also related to the integrated QMS. TQM philosophy enables class practitioners to
decentralize power by assigning learners specific leadership positions and tasks in the
classroom (Ngwenya, 2013). Education for Sustainable Development has prompted
innovative teaching approaches that facilitate the diffusion of knowledge and promote
skills development (Laurie et al., 2016).
Effective teaching may be best seen as a multidimensional construct (Virtanen et al., 2015);
there is no unified method in teaching practices (Amzat, 2017). Teachers use a diverse range
of approaches and resources (Catling, 2017), whereas new teaching approaches should be
developed (Cheng and Yau, 2011). Motivation of learners, recognition of good performance,
TQM

clear learner support structures (Makoelle, 2014) and communication exchange (Amzat, 2017)
are pivotal. Kabouridis and Link (2001) concluded that adults need more practical training to
absorb new concepts.
3.3.5.2 Teacher professional development. Teachers should be able to analyze their
experience and transform it in professional knowledge (Konidari and Abernot, 2006). School
leadership plays fundamental role in ensuring the quality of continued teacher development
(Pansiri, 2008). In some cases, teachers are poorly trained seniors in age, less motivated in
further education and inconsistent with the subjects they teach (Jiayi and Ying, 2009). Ko et al.
(2012) highlighted the importance of the learning directed professionalism of teachers,
whereas Catling (2017) the need for the teachers to be knowledgeable about pedagogic
content. Sometimes, teachers lack confidence and expertise in the use of data for the
improvement of teaching, learning and student outcomes (Ah-Teck and Starr, 2014). They do
not know how to improve disabled students’talents because they are not educated on the
subject (Ozberk et al., 2019). Thus, it is important the quality of their educational levels to be
increased (Biltagy, 2012;Ismail and Awang, 2017) in parallel with motives for continuous
training (Konidari and Abernot, 2006). It is important to establish a preparation program for
teachers with high standards, while the licensing standards should be raised and the
management of organizations involved in preparing high-quality school teachers should be
improved (Mattavarat et al., 2017).
3.3.5.3 Teacher performance. Leaders of Ministry of Education have never created a policy
for the systems of production, recruitment, appointment and qualification of school teachers
(Mattavarat et al., 2017). On the other hand, teachers recognize the importance of conducting
self-evaluation for their profession (Podgornik and Vogrinc, 2017). However, a teacher’s value
feedback should be specific, frequent, evidence-based, and related to professional
development opportunities (Liu et al., 2019).
3.3.5.4 Workload of teachers. TQM and the integrated QMS increase workload in such a
way that teachers and managers have difficulty to perform their work effectively (Hlongwane
and Mestry, 2013). Teaching workload and lack of sufficient personnel in schools (Sebola and
Malema, 2014) impede the successful implementation of the integrated QMS. In the same line,
teachers in the “moving schools”perceive themselves as working harder with a heavier
workload comparing to the teachers of “stuck”schools (Ko et al., 2012). The larger the teacher
workforce, the lower the values in quality dimensions (Fern
andez-Diaz et al., 2017). In
addition, the quantity of non-teaching time and quality of teaching are positively correlated
(Verwimp, 1999).
3.3.6 Pupils. 3.3.6.1 Pupil Performance. Pansiri (2008) pointed out the significance of
learners’inability, lack of freedom for self-expression and inadequate acquisition of basic
literacy skills. An emphasis is given on students’achievement scores (Ploom and Haldma,
2013), but this perspective acknowledges the broader aspects of education (Ibrahim et al.,
2017;Yoo, 2019). Cravens et al. (2011) support the view that schools are still caught between
the existing system that measures school performance by achievement and the intended
accountability scheme that calls for enhanced student ability. Education for sustainable
development or Deming’s quality management principles could improve test scores and help
achieve other desired outcomes (Laurie et al., 2016), while management by objectives appears
statistically insignificant or negative correlated to ancillary measures of student performance
(Lindberg and Wilson, 2011). Sexual bias, age, pre-school experience, occupational
preferences and location of school affect students’performance (Mosha, 1988;Albaker, 2017).
3.3.6.2 School dropout. Individual’s demand for schooling depends on the number of years
of schooling, the ability differences and the quality of education (Biltagy, 2012). Quality
influences the decision to enroll less than the decision to carry on (Bergmann, 1996).
Education systems capable of retaining their pupils tend to perform better in student
assessment tests (Nir and Kafle, 2013). The efforts of teachers to enroll children, the flexibility
Findings of
QM studies in
education

of the school calendar and the availability of seats are the three most important factors for
enrollment (Verwimp, 1999).
3.3.6.3 Pupil orientation. Students’learning should be individualized, localized and
globalized (Kabouridis and Link, 2001). Cunningham (2012) developed an instrument to
measure a school’s level of child-friendliness (including elements such as classrooms,
playground, school gardens, school gates and fences, school workshop and teachers). Student
orientation puts students and their needs “at the center of instruction”(Taut and Rakoczy,
2016). Virtanen et al. (2015) suggest be sensitive to students’needs and that establishing a
positive classroom climate is not enough to fully engage students.
4. Conclusions and practical implications
The debate on the applicability of QM for primary and secondary schools and the absence of a
literature review study presenting and analyzing study findings in this field, motivated the
authors of this paper to conduct a SLR. This study contributes to the literature by, firstly,
presenting analytically the findings of studies on QM in primary and secondary education,
secondly, formulating meaningful themes of these findings and in turn broad categories of
these themes, and finally, prioritizing the themes revealed. The fact that the present study
analyzes the findings of QM studies using two acknowledged quality tools namely the
“Affinity diagram”and the “Pareto diagram,”enhances the value of the present study.
Thefindings of the presentSLR show thatthe themes withthe highest numberof findings of
studies on QM in primary and secondary education are the following: headmasters’leadership,
QMS and quality assurance, relationship and collaboration among stakeholders, school
performance and quality of education, and government role. These themes are the top five of
thoseincluded in the teamof themes namely, “vital,”createdbased on the Paretoanalysis which
distinguishes them from the “useful”ones. As far as the broad categories of themes are
concerned, based on the number of findings of studies on QM, they are prioritized as follows:
management practices, school characteristics, stakeholders, government, teachers and pupils.
The present SLR is beneficial for researchers and practitioners. An analytical as well as a
summarized picture of study findings in the field of QM in primary and secondary education
is provided to both of them. The analytically presented findings of QM studies as well as their
“vital”and “useful”themes can be used by researchers as guidelines for their future studies.
The “vital”themes are research avenues that should be neglected by researchers, at least in
the short term, while the “useful”themes should be considered with priority from the research
perspective. However, the primary academic contribution of the present SLR concerns the
conceptual framework developed which consists of two layers: the first order latent
constructs meaning the themes of findings of the QM studies in primary and secondary
education and the second order latent constructs meaning the broad theme categories. The
latent constructs of these two layers can be used by academics as theoretical elements that
need to be included in a comprehensive framework depicting the QM implementation in
primary and secondary education.
As far as practitioners are concerned, priority should be given to the “vital”themes of
findings of QM studies in primary and secondary education and not the “useful”ones. In
other words, the “vital”themes and the respective analytical findings of QM studies should be
adopted by practitioners at school and government level in order to properly adjust and
improve their QM implementation plans.
5. Limitations and suggestions for future literature review studies
Similar to any study, the present one suffers from some limitations. First, the expert panel
made the decision to focus only on academic journal articles, while books, online sites,
TQM

conference proceedings, reports and grey literature were excluded. Moreover, Scopus or Web
of Science were not included. This can be considered as a myopic practice. In addition, only
English articles were used due to the authors’linguistic limitations. This can also be
considered as a research limitation. Furthermore, the subjectivity of grouping the findings of
the QM studies is also a limitation of this SLR. Thus, a replication of this review is encouraged
to validate the structure of the themes or the broader categories revealed.
References
Ah-Teck, J.C. and Starr, K. (2013), “Principals’perceptions of ‘quality’in Mauritian schools using the
Baldrige framework”,Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 51 No. 5, pp. 680-704.
Ah-Teck, J.C. and Starr, K.E. (2014), “Total Quality Management in Mauritian education and
principals’decision-making for school improvement: ‘Driven’or ‘informed’by data?”,Journal of
Educational Administration, Vol. 52 No. 6, pp. 833-849.
Al-Alawi, A.I., Abdulmohsen, M., Al-Malki, F.M. and Mehrotra, A. (2019), “Investigating the barriers
to change management in public sector educational institutions”,International Journal of
Educational Management, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 112-148.
Al-Kurdi, O., El-Haddadeh, R. and Eldabi, T. (2018), “Knowledge sharing in higher education
institutions: a systematic review”,Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 31 No. 2,
pp. 226-246.
Albaker, K. (2017), “Analytical view of Bahrain’s government schools’performance: a quality
perspective”,SAGE Open, October-December, pp. 1-6, doi: 10.1177/2158244017736555.
Amzat, I.H. (2017), “Key performance indicators for excellent teachers in Malaysia: a measurement
model for excellent teaching practices”,International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management, Vol. 66 No. 3, pp. 298-319.
Anastasiadou, S.D., Zirinoglou, P.A. and Florou, G.S. (2014), “The European foundation quality
management evaluation of Greek primary and secondary education”,Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 143, pp. 932-940.
Andersen, V.N., Dahler-Larsen, P. and Pedersen, C.S. (2009), “Quality assurance and evaluation in
Denmark”,Journal of Education Policy, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 135-147.
Aquilani, B., Silvestri, C., Ruggieri, A. and Gatti, C. (2017), “A systematic literature review on total
quality management critical success factors and the identification of new avenues of research”,
The TQM Journal, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 184-213.
Asaaju, O.A. (2012), “Reconstruction of infrastructure for quality assurance in Nigeria public
secondary schools”,Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 69, pp. 924-932.
Asagwara, K.C.P. (1997), “Quality of learning in Nigeria’s universal primary education scheme-1976-
1986”,The Urban Review, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 189-203.
Babalis, T., Tsoli, K., Koutouvela, C., Stavrou, N. and Alexopoulos, N. (2012), “Quality and effectiveness
in Greek primary school”,Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 69, pp. 1462-1468.
Bajaj, S., Garg, R. and Sethi, M. (2018), “Total quality management: a critical literature review using
Pareto analysis”,International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 67
No. 1, pp. 128-154.
Balzer, W.K., Francis, D.E., Krehbiel, T.C. and Shea, N. (2016), “A review and perspective on lean in
higher education”,Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 442-462.
Banerji, R. and Mukherjee, A.N. (2008), “Achieving universal elementary education in India: future
strategies for ensuring access, quality and finance”,The Journal of Applied Economic Research,
Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 213-228.
Bergmann, H. (1996), “Quality of education and the demand for education, evidence from developing
countries”,International Review of Education, Vol. 42 No. 6, pp. 581-604.
Findings of
QM studies in
education

Berry, G. (1997), “Leadership and the development of quality culture in schools”,International Journal
of Educational Management, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 52-64.
Bhamu, J. and Sangwan, K.S. (2014), “Lean manufacturing: literature review and research issues”,
International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 34 No. 7, pp. 876-940.
Bija, T., Geijselb, F.P. and Ten Damd, G.T.M. (2016), “Improving the quality of education through self-
evaluation in Dutch secondary schools”,Studies in Educational Evaluation, Vol. 49, pp. 42-50.
Biltagy, M. (2012), “Quality of education, earnings and demand function for schooling in Egypt: an
economic analysis”,Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 69, pp. 1741-1750.
Bolotov, V.A. and Efremova, N.F. (2007), “The system for evaluating the: quality of Russian
education”,Russian Education and Society, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 6-23.
Bouranta, N., Psomas, E., Su
arez-Barraza, M.F. and Jaca, C. (2019), “The key factors of Total Quality
Management in the service sector: a cross-cultural study”,Benchmarking: An International
Journal, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 893-921.
Brien, S., McNamara, G., O’Hara, J. and Brown, M. (2019), “Irish teachers, starting on a journey of data
use for school self-evaluation”,Studies In Educational Evaluation, Vol. 60, pp. 1-13.
Bunyi, G.W. (2013), “The quest for quality education: the case of curriculum innovations in Kenya”,
European Journal of Training and Development, Vol. 37 No. 7, pp. 678-691.
Bush, T. and Glover, D. (2016), “School leadership and management in South Africa: findings from a
systematic literature review”,International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 30 No. 2,
pp. 211-231.
Bush, T., Hamid, S.A., Ng, A. and Kaparou, M. (2018), “School leadership theories and the Malaysia
education blueprint: findings from a systematic literature review”,International Journal of
Educational Management, Vol. 32 No. 7, pp. 1245-1265.
Catling, S. (2017), “High quality in primary humanities: insights from the UK’s school inspectorates”,
Education, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 354-364.
Chen, H., Su, Y., Zheng, Q. and Li, L. (2019), “Towards an operationalized and effective school self-
evaluation system: an ongoing action research study in Chinese secondary schools since 2011”,
Studies in Educational Evaluation, Vol. 60, pp. 117-129.
Cheng, Y.C. (2003), “Quality assurance in education: internal, interface, and future”,Quality Assurance
in Education, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 202-213.
Cheng, Y.C. and Cheung, W.M. (2004), “Four types of school environment: multilevel self-management
and educational quality”,Educational Research and Evaluation, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 71-100.
Cheng, A.L.F. and Yau, H.K. (2011), “Principals’and teachers’perceptions of quality management in
Hong Kong primary schools”,Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 170-186.
Chua, C.L. and Mosha, H.J. (2015), “Managing school internal mechanisms for performance
improvement in secondary education: case of six secondary schools in Eastern Zone in
Tanzania”,SAGE Open, October-December, pp. 1-9.
Cravens, X.C., Chu, H. and Zhao, Q. (2011), “Defining school effectiveness in the reform for quality-
oriented education”,The Impact and Transformation of Education Policy in China, Vol. 15,
pp. 153-185.
Crawford, L.E.D. and Shutler, P. (1999), “Total quality management in education: problems and issues for
the classroom teacher”,International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 67-73.
Cruz, F.J.F., Galvez, I.E. and Santaolalla, R.C. (2016), “Impact of quality management systems on
teaching-learning processes”,Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 394-415.
Cunningham, A.J.C. (2012), “Understanding local realities of quality education in Kenya: pupil, parent
and teacher perspectives”,Research in Comparative and International Education, Vol. 7 No. 3,
pp. 296-341.
Cuttance, P. (1994), “Quality assurence in education systems”,Studies in Educational Evaluation,
Vol. 20, pp. 99-112.
TQM

Dembele, M. and Lefoka, P. (2007), “Pedagogical renewal for quality universal primary education:
overview of trends in sub-Saharan Africa”,International Review of Education, Vol. 53, pp. 531-553.
Detert, J.R., Schroeder, R.G. and Cudeck, R. (2003), “The measurement of quality management culture
in schools: development and validation of the SQMCS”,Journal of Operations Management,
Vol. 21, pp. 307-328.
Diaz, J.A.A. and Martinez-Mediano, C. (2018), “The impact of ISO quality management systems on
primary and secondary schools in Spain”,Quality Assurance in Education,Vol.26
No. 1, pp. 2-24.
Doherty, G.D. (2008), “On quality in education”,Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 255-265.
Dora, H.C. (2007), “Policy of quality assurance in Hong Kong preschools”,Early Child Development and
Care, Vol. 177 No. 5, pp. 493-505.
Elahi, F. and Ilyas, M. (2019), “Quality management principles and school quality: testing moderation
of professional certification of school principal in private schools of Pakistan”,The TQM
Journal, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 578-599.
Elmelegy, R.I. (2015), “School-based management: an approach to decision-making quality in Egyptian
general secondary schools”,School Leadership and Management, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 79-96.
Ezenwaji, I.O., Otu, M.S., Ezegbe, B.N., Okide, C.C. and Eseadi, C. (2019), “Community participation in
quality assurance in secondary school management: the case of school-based management
committee (SBMC)”,Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 24-40.
Fern
andez-Cruz, F.J., Rodr

ıguez-Mantilla, J.M. and Fern
andez-D

ıaz, M.J. (2019), “Assessing the impact
of ISO: 9001 implementation on school teaching and learning processes”,Quality Assurance in
Education, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 285-303.
Fern
andez-Diaz, M.J., Rodr

ıguez-Mantilla, J.M. and Abad, M.F. (2016), “Impact of implementation of
quality management systems on internal communications and external relations at schools”,
Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, Vol. 27 Nos 1-2, pp. 97-110.
Fern
andez-Diaz, M.J., Rodr

ıguez-Mantilla, J.M. and Jover-Olmeda, G. (2017), “Evaluation of the impact
of intervention programmes on education organisations: application to a quality management
system”,Evaluation and Program Planning, Vol. 63, pp. 116-122.
Freeman, R. (1994), “Quality assurance in secondary education”,Quality Assurance in Education,
Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 21-25.
Forlin, C. (2010), “Developing and implementing quality inclusive education in Hong Kong,
implications for teacher education”,Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, Vol. 10
No. 1, pp. 177-184.
Galvez, I.E., Cruz, F.J.F. and Diaz, M.J.F. (2016), “Evaluation of the impact of quality management
systems on school climate”,International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 30 No. 4,
pp. 474-492.
Gillies, D. (2007), “Excellence and education: rhetoric and reality”,Education, Knowledge and
Economy, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 19-35.
Gorostiaga, J.M. and Ferreira, A. (2012), “Discourses and policies on educational quality in Argentina,
1990-2010”,Research in Comparative and International Education, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 364-375.
Guerra, S.C. and Lastra-Anadon, C.X. (2019), “The quality-access trade off in decentralizing public
services: evidence from education in the OECD and Spain”,Journal of Comparative Economics,
Vol. 47, pp. 295-316.
Gumus, S. (2012), “Investigating the relationship between the quality of education and level of
educational attainment in Turkish provinces”,International Journal of Educational Reform,
Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 62-72.
Gustafsson, J.E., Ehren, M.C.M., Conyngham, G., McNamara, G., Altrichter, H. and O’Hara, J. (2015),
“From inspection to quality: ways in which school inspection influences change in schools”,
Studies In Educational Evaluation, Vol. 47, pp. 47-57.
Findings of
QM studies in
education

Harma, J. (2019), “Ensuring quality education? Low-fee private schools and government regulation in
three Sub-Saharan African capitals”,International Journal of Educational Development, Vol. 66,
pp. 139-146.
Hlongwane, T.S. and Mestry, R. (2013), “Empowering teacher teams to implement the integrated
quality management systems in South African secondary schools”,Journal of Social Sciences,
Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 269-277.
Hofman, R.H., Dijkstra, N.J. and Hofman, W.H.A. (2008), “Internal versus external quality
management”,International Journal of Leadership in Education, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 281-300.
Hofman, R.H., Boom, J., Meeuwisse, M. and Hofman, W.H.A. (2012), “Educational innovation, quality,
and effects: an exploration of innovations and their effects in secondary education”,Educational
Policy, Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 843-866.
Hooge, E. and Honingh, M. (2014), “Are school boards aware of the educational quality of their
schools?”,Educational Management Administration and Leadership, Vol. 42 No. 4, pp. 139-154.
Hu, Q., Mason, R., Williams, S.J. and Found, P. (2015), “Lean implementation within SMEs: a literature
review”,Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 26 No. 7, pp. 980-1012.
Ibrahim, Y., Arshad, R. and Salleh, D. (2017), “Stakeholder perceptions of secondary education quality
in Sokoto state, Nigeria”,Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 248-267.
Ismail, R. and Awang, M. (2017), “Quality of Malaysian teachers based on education and training: a
benefit and earnings returns analysis using human capital theory”,Quality Assurance in
Education, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 303-316.
Jiayi, W. and Ying, L. (2009), “Research on the teaching quality of compulsory education in China’s
west rural schools”,Frontiers of Education in China, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 66-93.
Kabouridis, G. and Link, D. (2001), “Quality assessment of continuing education short courses”,
Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 103-109.
Kelly, G. and Lassa, P. (1983), “The quality of learning in Nigerian primary education. The UPE
programme 1976-1982”,International Review of Education, pp. 231-243.
Kiremitci, O., Gencer, R.T., Demiray, E. and Unutmaz, V. (2014), “An investigation on work-related
behaviors and perceptions of school quality management culture of K-12 teachers”,The
Anthropologist, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 165-170.
Kitsing, M., Boyle, A., Kukemelk, H. and Mikk, J. (2016), “The impact of professional capital on
educational excellence and equality in Estonia”,Journal of Professional Capital and Community,
Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 237-252.
Knipprath, H. and Arimoto, M. (2007), “The impact of education reform on the quality assurance
system in Japan”,Educational Research for Policy and Practice, Vol. 6, pp. 205-217.
Ko, J.Y.C., Hallinger, P. and Walker, A.D. (2012), “Exploring school improvement in Hong Kong
secondary schools”,Peabody Journal of Education, Vol. 87 No. 2, pp. 216-234.
Konidari, V. and Abernot, Y. (2006), “From TQM to learning organisation: another way for quality
management in educational institutions”,International Journal of Quality and Reliability
Management, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 8-26.
Kool, D. and Bekkers, V. (2015), “The perceived impact of open inspection data on the quality of
education in Dutch primary schools: a parent perspective”,Social Science Computer Review,
Vol. 33 No. 5, pp. 645-659.
Kwan, P.Y.K. (1996), “Application of total quality management in education: retrospect and prospect”,
International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 10 No. 5, pp. 25-35.
Lagrosen, S. (1999), “TQM goes to school: an effective way of improving school quality”,The TQM
Magazine, Vol. 11 No. 5, pp. 328-332.
Laurie, R., Nonoyama-Tarumi, Y., McKeown, R. and Hopkins, C. (2016), “Contributions of education
for sustainable development (ESD) to quality education: a synthesis of research”,Journal of
Education for Sustainable Development, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 226-242.
TQM

LeMahieu, P.G., Nordstrum, L.E. and Greco, P. (2017), “Lean for education”,Quality Assurance in
Education, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 74-90.
Lindberg, E. and Wilson, T.L. (2011), “Management by objectives: the Swedish experience in upper
secondary schools”,Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 62-75.
LiuVisone, Y.J., Mongillo, M.B. and Lisi, P. (2019), “What matters to teachers if evaluation is meant to
help them improve?”,Studies in Educational Evaluation, Vol. 61, pp. 41-54.
L
opez, V., SistoBaleriolaGarciaCarrasco, V.E.A.C., N
u~
nez, C.G. and Vald
es, R. (2019), “A struggle for
translation: an actor-network analysis of Chilean school violence and school climate policies”,
Educational Management Administration, Leadership, Vol. 5, pp. 1-24.
Lovat, T.J. (2010), “Synergies and balance between values education and quality teaching”,
Educational Philosophy and Theory, Vol. 42 No. 4, pp. 489-500.
Makoelle, T.M. (2014), “Exploring factors contributing to school improvement in South African
secondary schools in the free state province”,International Journal of Educational Sciences,
Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 119-130.
Manatos, M.J., Sarrico, C.S. and Rosa, M.J. (2017), “The integration of quality management in higher
education institutions: a systematic literature review”,Total Quality Management and Business
Excellence, Vol. 28 Nos 1-2, pp. 159-175.
Mattavarat, S., Viseshsiri, P. and Siribanpitak, P. (2017), “Proposed policy for preparation of high-
quality primary school teachers in Thailand”,Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 38,
pp. 105-110.
Mayne, H. (2014), “The social reconstructionist approach to teacher education: a necessary component
to achieving excellence and quality education for all”,Research in Comparative and
International Education, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 48-55.
McGonagill, B. (1997), “Gifted education long-range planning: using time wisely with TQM”,Roeper
Review, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 200-203.
Mel, M.A. (2007), “Quality assurance and assessment in education in Papua New Guinea”,Educational
Research for Policy and Practice, Vol. 6, pp. 219-228.
Minina, E. (2017), “Quality revolution in post-Soviet education in Russia: from control to assurance?”,
Journal of Education Policy, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 176-197.
Mok, K. (2003), “Decentralization and marketization of education in Singapore: a case study of the
school excellence model”,Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 348-366.
Mok, M.M.C. (2007), “Quality assurance and school monitoring in Hong Kong”,Educational Research
for Policy and Practice, Vol. 6, pp. 187-204.
Mosha, H.J. (1988), “A reassessment of the indicators of primary education quality in developing
countries: emerging evidence from Tanzania”,International Review of Education,
pp. 17-45.
Moura Sa, P. and Martins, R. (2016), “Data quality requirements for water bills”,The TQM Journal,
Vol. 28 No. 6, pp. 933-953.
Murgatroud, S. (1992), “A new frame for managing schools: total quality management (TQM)”,School
Organization, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 175-200.
Musundire, A. and Dreyer, J.M. (2019), “Effectiveness of the clinical supervision strategy as a tool for
improving teaching quality: perceptions of South African school-based managers and
educators”,Africa Education Review, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 109-125.
Nawelwa, J., Sichinsambwe, C. and Mwanza, B.G. (2015), “An analysis of total quality management
(TQM) practices in Zambian secondary schools: a survey of Lusaka district”,The TQM Journal,
Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 716-731.
Ng, P.T. (2008), “The phases and paradoxes of educational quality assurance: the case of the
Singapore education system”,Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 112-125.
Findings of
QM studies in
education

Ngware, M.W., Wamukuru, D.K. and Odebero, S.O. (2006), “Total quality management in secondary
schools in Kenya: extent of practice”,Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 339-362.
Ngwenya, V.C. (2013), “The decentralisation of power within the total quality management (TQM)
paradigm in classroom management (DPTQM)”,Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 37 No. 3,
pp. 259-268.
Nir, A.E. and Kafle, B.S. (2013), “The effect of political stability on public education quality”,
International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 110-126.
Odhiambo, G. (2008), “Elusive search for quality education: the case of quality assurance and teacher
accountability”,International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 417-431.
Ordanini, A., Rubera, G. and Defillippi, R. (2008), “The many moods of inter-organizational imitation: a
critical review”,International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 375-398.
Othman, M. and Muijs, D. (2013), “Educational quality differences in a middle-income country: the
urban-rural gap in Malaysian primary schools”,School Effectiveness and School Improvement,
Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 1-18.
Othman,R.andRauf,F.A.(2009),“Implementing school performance index (SPIn) in Malaysian
primary schools”,International Journal of Educational Management,Vol.23No.6,
pp. 505-522.
Oswald, K. and Moriarty, K. (2009), “Transforming children’s lives through innovation in quality
education: implications for policy and practice”,IDS Introductory and Development Studies,
Practice Papers, Vol. 4, pp. 1-29.
Ozberk, O., Sharma, R.C. and Dagli, G. (2019), “School teachers’and administrators’opinions about
disability services, quality of schools, total quality management and quality tools”,
International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, Vol. 66 No. 6, pp. 598-609.
Pansiri, N.O. (2008), “Instructional leadership for quality learning. An assessment of the impact of the
primary school management development project in Botswana”,Educational Management
Administration and Leadership, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 471-494.
Peter, T. and Brockling, U. (2017), “Equality and excellence. Hegemonic discourses of economisation
within the German education system”,International Studies in Sociology of Education, Vol. 26
No. 3, pp. 231-247.
Ploom, K. and Haldma, T. (2013), “Balanced performance management in the public education system:
an empirical study of Estonian general education schools”,Baltic Journal of Management, Vol. 8
No. 2, pp. 183-207.
Podgornik, V. and Vogrinc, J. (2017), “The role of headteachers, teachers, and school counselors in
the system of quality assessment and assurance of school work”,SAGE Open, April-
June, pp. 1-13.
Pourrajab, M., Basri, R., Daud, S.M. and Asimiran, S. (2015), “The resistance to change in
implementation of total quality management (TQM) in Iranian schools”,The TQM Journal,
Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 532-543.
Powell, L.A. (2000), “Realising the value of self-assessment: the influence of the business excellence
model on teacher professionalism”,European Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 23 No. 1,
pp. 37-48.
Prakash, G. (2018), “Quality in higher education institutions: insights from the literature”,The TQM
Journal, Vol. 30 No. 6, pp. 732-748.
Psomas, E. and Jaca, C. (2016), “The impact of total quality management on service company
performance: evidence from Spain”,International Journal of Quality and Reliability
Management, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 380-398.
Psomas, E., Vlachopoulou, P. and Antony, J. (2019), “Future research agenda of quality management
in primary and secondary education. A systematic literature review”,Fifth International
Conference on Lean Six Sigma for Higher Education, 24-25 June, 2019, Edinburgh.
TQM

Quong, T. and Walker, A. (1996), “TQM and school restructuring: a case study”,School Organisation,
Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 219-231.
Rodr

ıguez-Mantilla, J.M., Fern
andez-Cruz, F.J. and Fern
andez-Diaz, M.J. (2018), “Factors associated
with the impact of implementing quality management systems at schools: a multilevel
analysis”,Total Quality Management and Business Excellence. doi: 10.1080/14783363.2018.
1490642.
Rodr
ıguez-Mantilla, J.M., Fern
andez-D

ıaz, F.J. and Carrascosa, V.L. (2019a), “Validation of a
questionnaire to evaluate the impact of ISO 9001 standards in schools with a confirmatory
factor analysis”,Studies In Educational Evaluation, Vol. 62, pp. 37-48.
Rodr

ıguez-Mantilla, J.M., Fern
andez-Cruz, F.J. and Fern
andez-D
ıaz, M.J. (2019b), “Comparative
analysis between management team and teachers on the impact of ISO 9001 standards in
educational centres”,International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, Vol. 11 No. 2,
pp. 248-264.
Saiti, A. (2012), “Leadership and quality management: an analysis of three key features of the Greek
education system”,Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 110-138.
Saiti, A. and Fassoulis, K. (2012), “Job satisfaction: factor analysis of Greek primary school principals’
perceptions”,International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 370-380.
Sarin, M.N. (2015), “Quality education for all? A case study of a New Delhi government school”,Policy
Futures in Education, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 360-374.
Sarrico, C.S. and Rosa, M.J. (2016), “Supply chain quality management in education”,International
Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 499-517.
Sebola, M.P. and Malema, P.W. (2014), “South African teachers’perception of integrated quality
management systems: Mopani district secondary schools, Limpopo province”,Journal of Social
Sciences, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 233-242.
Senol, H. and Dagli, G. (2016), “Quality improvement in secondary schools: developing a school self-
evaluation scale”,International Journal of Educational Sciences, Vol. 15 Nos 1-2, pp. 53-65.
Sfakianaki, E. (2019), “A measurement instrument for implementing total quality management in
Greek primary and secondary education”,International Journal of Educational Management,
Vol. 33 No. 5, pp. 1065-1081.
Sfakianaki, E. and Kakouris, A. (2019), “Lean thinking for education: development and validation of
an instrument”,International Journal of Quality, Reliability Management, Vol. 36 No. 6,
pp. 917-950.
Sifuna, D.N. (2007), “The challenge of increasing access and improving quality: an analysis of
universal primary education interventions in Kenya and Tanzania since the 1970s”,
International Review of Education, Vol. 53, pp. 687-699.
Soria-Garcia, J. and Martinez-Lorente, A.R. (2014), “Development and validation of a measure of the
quality management practices in education”,Total Quality Management and Business
Excellence, Vol. 25 Nos 1-2, pp. 57-79.
Srichai, P., Yodmongkol, P., Sureephong, P. and Meksamoot, K. (2013), “Managing school safety in
Thailand: assessing the implications and potential of a lean thinking framework”,SAGE Open,
April-June, pp. 1-17, doi: 10.1177/2158244013489985.
Stephens, D. (1991), “The quality of primary education in developing countries: who defines and who
decides?”,Comparative Education, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 223-233.
Strunk, K.O., Marsh, J.A., Bush-Mecenas, S.C. and Duque, M.R. (2016), “The best laid plans: an
examination of school plan quality and implementation in a school improvement initiative”,
Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 259-309.
Sulaiman, N.F., Manochehri, N.N. and Al- Esmail, R.A. (2013), “Level of total quality management
adoption in Qatari educational institutions: private and semi-government sector”,Journal of
Education for Business, Vol. 88 No. 2, pp. 76-87.
Findings of
QM studies in
education

Suominen, O., Kallo, J., Rinne, R. and Fan, Y. (2017), “Subtle convergence?: locating similarities
between Chinese educational reforms and global quality assurance and evaluation trends”,
Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 146-160.
Svensson, M. and Klefsjo, B. (2006), “TQM-based self-assessment in the education sector: experiences
from a Swedish upper secondary school project”,Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 14 No. 4,
pp. 299-323.
Talib, F., Rahman, Z. and Qureshi, M.N. (2013), “An empirical investigation of relationship between
total quality management practices and quality performance in Indian service companies”,
International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 280-318.
Tan, A.H.T., Muskat, B. and Zehrer, A. (2016), “A systematic review of quality of student experience
in higher education”,International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, Vol. 8 No. 2,
pp. 209-228.
Tari, J.J. and Dick, G. (2016), “Trends in quality management research in higher education
institutions”,Journal of Service Theory and Practice, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 273-296.
Taut, S. and Rakoczy, K. (2016), “Observing instructional quality in the context of school evaluation”,
Learning and Instruction, Vol. 46, pp. 45-60.
Thawinkarn, D., Tang, K.N. and Ariratana, W. (2018), “Relationship between perceived directors’
leadership and classroom quality of primary schools in Thailand”,Kasetsart Journal of Social
Sciences, Vol. 39, pp. 230-235.
Thonhauser, T. (2008), “Factors that relate to the time to ISO 9000 registration in education
institutions”,School Effectiveness and School Improvement, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 333-349.
Thonhauser, T. and Passmore, D.L. (2006), “ISO 9000 in education: a comparison between the United
States and england”,Research in Comparative and International Education, Vol. 1 No. 2,
pp. 156-173.
Toremen, F., Karakus
¸, M. and Yasan, T. (2009), “Total quality management practices in Turkish
primary schools”,Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 30-44.
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D. and Smart, P. (2003), “Towards a methodology for developing evidence-
informed management knowledge by means of systematic review”,British Journal of
Management, Vol. 14, pp. 207-222.
Tsinidou, V., Gerogiannis, M. and Fitsilis, P. (2010), “Evaluation of the factors that determine quality in
higher education: an empirical study”,Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 227-244.
Verwimp, P. (1999), “Measuring the quality of education at two levels: a case study of primary schools
in rural Ethiopia”,International Review of Education, Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 167-196.
Virtanen, T.E., Lerkkanen, M.K., Poikkeus, A.M. and Kuorelahti, M. (2015), “The relationship between
classroom quality and students’engagement in secondary school”,Educational Psychology,
Vol. 35 No. 8, pp. 963-983.
Weller, L.D. (2000), “School attendance problems: using the TQM tools to identify root causes”,Journal
of Educational Administration, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 64-82.
Yeom, M.H., Acedo, C. and Utomo, E. (2002), “The reform of secondary education in Indonesia during
the 1990s: basic education expansion and quality improvement through curriculum
decentralization”,Asia Pacific Education Review, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 56-68.
Yoo, J. (2019), “The impact of conflict among political actors on implementing South Korea’s new
teacher evaluation policy: a case study with implications for education policymaking”,Studies
In Educational Evaluation, Vol. 61, pp. 94-104.
Yoshida, K. (1994), “The deming approach to education: a comparative study of the USA and Japan”,
International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 8 No. 5, pp. 29-40.
Zhang, Y., Qin, F. and Liu, J. (2019), “Improving education equality and quality: evidence from a
natural experiment in China”,International Journal of Educational Development,
Vol. 70, pp. 1-12.
TQM

Further reading
Ng, P.T. and Chan, D. (2008), “A comparative study of Singapore’s school excellence model with Hong
Kong’s school-based management”,International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 22
No. 6, pp. 488-505.
Corresponding author
Evangelos Psomas can be contacted at: epsomas@cc.uoi.gr
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
Findings of
QM studies in
education