Möchten Sie über diese Zeitschrift informiert bleiben? Klicken Sie bitte auf die Buttons, um unsere Alerts zu abonnieren.
Möchten Sie über diese Zeitschrift informiert bleiben? Klicken Sie bitte auf die Buttons, um unsere Alerts zu abonnieren.
Evaluating Higher Education by Indicators
in International Journal of Chinese EducationSearch for other papers by Roger King in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
This piece looks at indicators and data models in countries outside China to see if such approaches may contribute to the accountability and quality drives in higher education in China. It notes the policy movement in China from rapid student number expansion to more emphasis on quality and social purpose as desirable characteristics for its universities and colleges. The article remarks that establishing legibility to the center to enable effective but lighter-touch surveillance of higher education institutions is difficult in large mass sectors without a major commitment of resources and bureaucratic intervention which may not be desired by all stakeholders. Rather, it is suggested that utilizing good data and indicators may be one means of overcoming the difficulties in balancing central public control with the increased autonomy of universities in China.
The article distinguishes between static data and dynamic data and goes on to consider the relevance of student posts on social media as an accurate guide to the student experience, a key component of the many institutional attempts in China to capture this dimension of quality.
Overall, the chapter debates the extent to which an over-reliance on indicators and data may decontextualize the rich experiences and nuances found in the learning and teaching processes. There is the danger of over-simplification and the “exclusion of narrative” necessary for a full understanding of the knowledge process. Rather, the author supports a ‘variable geometry’ of approach to quality assessment and other forms of higher education accountability. This would seek to utilize both external data and indicators alongside a peer review methodology in which human opinion and assessment remains important.
Kauf
Sofortzugang erwerben (PDF-Download und unbegrenzter Online-Zugang):
Institutszugang
Melden Sie sich mit Open Athens, Shibboleth oder Ihren institutionellen Anmeldedaten an.
Persönliche Anmeldung
Melden Sie sich mit Ihrem brill.com-Konto an
-
China Ministry of Education (2017). Statistical Yearbook of Chinese Education. Accessed from: www.moe.edu.cn/s78/A03/moe_560/jytjsj_2017/qg.
-
Davis, K. E., Fisher, A., Kingsbury, B., and Merry, S. E. (Eds.). (2012). Governance by indicators: Global power through classification and rankings. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-
Espeland, W. (2015). Narrating numbers. In R. Rottenburg, S. E. Merry, S. J. Park and J. Mugler (Eds.), The World of Indicators: The making of governmental knowledge through quantification, (pp. 56-75). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-
Griffiths, A., King, R., and Leaver, M. (2018). The wisdom of students: Monitoring quality through student reviews. Gloucester, UK: Quality Assurance Agency.
-
King, R. (2018). Governance and power through indicators: The UK Higher Education Teaching Excellence and Student Outcome Framework. In H. Weingarten, Hicks, M. and Kaufman, A. (Eds.), Assessing quality in postsecondary education: International perspectives, (pp. 67-84). Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
-
McCormick, A. M. and Kinzie, J. (2018). Quality as both state and process: Implications for performance-indicator systems. In H. Weingarten, Hicks, M. and Kaufman, A. (Eds.), Assessing quality in postsecondary education: International perspectives, (pp. 27-48). Montreal: McGill-Queens University Press.
-
Sarfaty, G. A. (2015). Measuring corporate accountability through global indicators. In S. E. Merry, K. E. Davis, and B. Kingsbury (Eds.), The quiet power of indicators: Measuring governance, corruption, and the rule of law (pp. 103-132). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-
Shi, J., Luo, Y., Wen, W. and Guo, F. (2018). Governing quality in a transforming higher education system: the Case of China. In Hazelkorn, E., Coates, H. and McCormick, A. C. (Eds.), Quality, performance, and accountability in higher education (pp. 371-381). Cheltenham, UK: Elgar.
-
Surowiecki, J. (2004). The wisdom of crowds. London: Little Brown.
-
Wilson, J. et al. (2015). The metric tide: Report of the independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment and management. Bristol: HEFCE.
| Insgesamt | Letzte 365 Tage | In den letzten 30 Tagen | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aufrufe von Kurzbeschreibungen | 345 | 41 | 17 |
| Gesamttextansichten | 428 | 1 | 0 |
| PDF-Downloads | 391 | 3 | 0 |
Evaluating Higher Education by Indicators
in International Journal of Chinese EducationSearch for other papers by Roger King in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
This piece looks at indicators and data models in countries outside China to see if such approaches may contribute to the accountability and quality drives in higher education in China. It notes the policy movement in China from rapid student number expansion to more emphasis on quality and social purpose as desirable characteristics for its universities and colleges. The article remarks that establishing legibility to the center to enable effective but lighter-touch surveillance of higher education institutions is difficult in large mass sectors without a major commitment of resources and bureaucratic intervention which may not be desired by all stakeholders. Rather, it is suggested that utilizing good data and indicators may be one means of overcoming the difficulties in balancing central public control with the increased autonomy of universities in China.
The article distinguishes between static data and dynamic data and goes on to consider the relevance of student posts on social media as an accurate guide to the student experience, a key component of the many institutional attempts in China to capture this dimension of quality.
Overall, the chapter debates the extent to which an over-reliance on indicators and data may decontextualize the rich experiences and nuances found in the learning and teaching processes. There is the danger of over-simplification and the “exclusion of narrative” necessary for a full understanding of the knowledge process. Rather, the author supports a ‘variable geometry’ of approach to quality assessment and other forms of higher education accountability. This would seek to utilize both external data and indicators alongside a peer review methodology in which human opinion and assessment remains important.
| Insgesamt | Letzte 365 Tage | In den letzten 30 Tagen | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aufrufe von Kurzbeschreibungen | 345 | 41 | 17 |
| Gesamttextansichten | 428 | 1 | 0 |
| PDF-Downloads | 391 | 3 | 0 |
