Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Accountability in higher education: The danger of unintended consequences

  • Published:
Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Higher education in Britain, which until recently had been allowed to conduct its affairs with minimal governmental direction, is now being subjected to increasing pressures resulting from governmental policy decisions, especially regarding public accountability. Such decisions have the effect of substantially changing social systems and frequently lead to unintended consequences, and a number of examples from higher education are given which illustrate this statement. These are analysed by means of a simple model of change. This model is then used to suggest a form of accountability based on a sharing of both power and responsibility between government and universities, which may be expected to reduce the probability of unintended consequences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Becher, T. and Kogan, M. (1987). Calling Britain's Universities to Account. London: Education Reform Group, Ginger Paper 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals (1985). Efficiency Studies in Universities (Jarratt Report). London: CVCP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals (1987). University Management Statistics and Performance Indicators. London: CVCP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Education Reform Bill (1987). London: HMSO, Bill 53.

  • Elton, L. (1987a). Teaching in Higher Education: Appraisal and Training. London: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elton, L. (1987b). “UGC resource allocation and the assessment of teaching quality”, Higher Education Review 19: 9–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elton, L. (1987c). “Warning signs”, Times Higher Education Supplement, 11 September, p. 12.

  • Engineering Professors Conference Research Unit (1986). Survey of engineering academic staff losses, gains and salaries. Report No. 2085.

  • Gold, K. and Turney, J. (1987). “Brain drain has not worsened, survey shows”, Times Higher Education Supplement, 22 May.

  • HMSO (1987). Higher Education: Meeting the Challenge. London: HMSO, Cm 114.

    Google Scholar 

  • House of Commons Public Accounts Committee (1985–6). Redundancy Compensation Payments to University Staff. London: HMSO, House of Commons, Paper 179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kells, H. R. (1987). Perspectives on University Self-Assessment. Enschede: 9th EAIR Forum.

  • Lewin, K. (1961). “Quasi-stationary social equalibria and the problem of permanent change”. In W. G. Bennis, K. D. Benne and R. Chin (eds.), The Planning of Change. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, pp. 235–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindop, N. (1985). “Validation revisited”, Times Higher Education Supplement, 29 November.

  • McKie, R. and Judd, J. (1987). “Scientists lose to the yuppie drain”, Observer, 5 July.

  • Moodie, G. C. and Eustace, R. (1974). Power and Authority in British Universities. London: Allen and Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neave, G. (1987). Judas Goat or Brave New World? Technological Change and the Relationship between Government and Higher Education. Enschede: 9th EAIR Forum.

  • OECD (1987). Innovation Policy-France. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, C. (1987). “The politics of performance assessment: Lessons for higher education”, Studies in Higher Education 12: 87–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Preuss, U. K. (1983). “Hochschulselbstverwaltung und Staat”. In L. Huber (ed.), Ausbildung und Sozialisation in der Hochschule. Enzyklopädie Erziehungswissenschaft. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, Vol. 10, pp. 281–303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Royal Society and Fellowship of Engineering (1987). The Migration of Scientists and Engineers to and from the UK. Science and Engineering Policy Study No.

  • Shattock, M. and Berdahl, R. (1984). “The British University Grants Committee 1919–83: Changing relationship with government and the universities”, Higher Education 13: 471–499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, T. (1987). “The UGC's research rankings exercise”, Higher Education Quarterly 41: 303–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tutt, N, (1985). The unintended consequences of integration, Educational and Child Psychology 2: 30–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • University Grants Committee (1985). Circular letters 12/85 and 22/85.

  • Van Vught, F. (1987). A New Autonomy in European Higher Education. Enschede: 9th EA1R Forum.

  • Williams, G. (1986). “The missing bottom line”. In G. C. Moodie (ed.), Standards and Criteria in Higher Education. Guildford: Society for Research into Higher Education, p. 32.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for the Advancement of Teaching in Higher Education, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK

    Lewis Elton

Authors
  1. Lewis Elton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Elton, L. Accountability in higher education: The danger of unintended consequences. High Educ 17, 377–390 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00139535

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00139535

Keywords

Search

Navigation