However, currently higher education not only concerned participants in the educational process (teachers, students, researchers and University Rectors), and to the Governments and their agencies, but also entrepreneurs and employers who consider universities as centers of training of professionals of high level and production of knowledge and technology essential to keep pace with economic development. By this, they highlight are new bindings of the University quality factors cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness. In the context of higher education, says Vega, the concept of quality, according to the customer’s requirements, raises several questions. First, who is the client of higher education?; Are clients students or agencies contributing resources; employers or parents who pay for their children’s education? What are the students?, are customers, products or both? Or perhaps should speak of students as consumers of education, because they are those who enter the system, suffer from the process and emerge educated. Very interesting also that gives us Vegas in its analysis, that quality should take into account that quality is a philosophical concept, their definitions vary, and in some ways reflect different perspectives of the individual and society. In a democratic society, where space must exist so that many people think different, there is a unique and correct definition of quality and, as It is a relative concept that depends on the individual that uses it.
Therefore it is possible that it is defined according to a range of qualities. However, you could try to define the criteria that each interested actor used when judging the quality of an institution. This pragmatic approach called to establish a set of criteria that reflect aspects of quality of common sense and find convenient ways to quantify such quality (without these forms become purposes). Having a set of criteria from the perspective of different groups and not sustain an unequivocal definition of quality can offer a practical solution to a philosophical matter highly complex, not because the absence of an underlying theory, but because different groups have the right to hold different perspectives. I.e., is perfectly legitimate governmental agencies require efficiency on the resources invested, for students and parents to demand excellence, that employers expect a product with fitness for a purpose and that the community generally considers that in education higher there must be total quality.
In short, must delve into leave guaranteed in the new education law to be approved, educational quality, not forgetting what brings us Graells, (2002) as: quality in education to all young people ensures the acquisition of knowledge, skills abilities and attitudes needed to match them for adult life. Also points out that a quality education system is characterized by: be accessible to all citizens. Facilitate personal, organizational and material resources, tailored to the needs of each student so that everyone can have the opportunities that will promote as far as possible their academic and personal progress. Promote change and innovation in the school and classrooms (what will be achieved, among other means, enabling reflection shared on own teaching practice and collaborative work of teachers). Promote the active participation of students, both in learning and in life of the institution, within a framework of values where everyone feels respected and valued as individuals. The participation of families and inserted into the community. Stimulate and facilitate the development and well-being of teachers and other professionals from the Centre.