Abstract:
This research is about the level of student involvement in decision-making in higher
education institutions, a case study of São Tomas de Moçambique University (USTM) in
2018. The study was guided by the following specific objectives: to identify the staff
involved in decision making at USTM; to describe the decision making process at USTM;
to indicate the level of student involvement in decision making at USTM; to list the merits
and demerits of involving students in decision making at USTM. For data collection,
questionnaires, interviews and observations were used. Data were collected from students,
lectures and board members from four faculties. To select respondents, intentional
sampling was used. Statistical research methods were used to organize, summarize and
analyze the data collected to draw the conclusions. The survey results identified that the
staff involved in decision-making in HEIs are the board members headed by the dean or
general director, college directors and course coordinators. Rarely students are involved in
decision making. Immediate decisions are usually made without prior consultation or
listening meetings especially when there is an emerging problem in the institution. There
are specific levels of decision making where the student can be involved. Students are
never involved in drafting and revising the institution's standards such as pedagogical
regulation. Students are rarely allowed to give their own strategies on how to improve
discipline in the institution, but in certain cases they are allowed to present their strategies
on how to improve their academic performance. HEI managers rarely dialogue with
students or consult students when making certain decisions, and rarely do students have
room to question or present their ideas, opinions or concerns to board members. Involving
students in decision making makes them identify with joint decisions; student morale is
high and authoritarian standards are reduced. Involving students in decision-making is
disadvantageous as there may be a danger of exposing institutional secrets and the process
may be very slow.
