Research in Higher Education

, Volume 4, Issue 4, pp 373–379 | Cite as

Assessing impact of institutional studies

  • Lynn H. Willett


A three-dimensional model which relates time, action, and audience components has been developed to assess impact of institutional studies. Elements of the models are: short, intermediate, and long-range time components; acceptance, nonresponse, and rejection actions; and primary, secondary, and tertiary audiences.

A variety of criterion measures and instruments have been identified to assist in the model implementation. A research impact gram (RIG) is offered as a comprehensive graphic analysis mechanism for the model. Data analysis limitations are noted for each of the model components.

Suggestions for further research are offered.

Key words

institutional research evaluation report-impact 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Farr, R. (1969). “Knowledge Linkers and the Flow of Education Information” Washington, D. C.: Office of Education (Dept. HEW). (ERIC document no. ED 032 438.Google Scholar
  2. Farr, R., and Pingree, S. (1970). “Research Utilization: An Annotated Bibliography” ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Media and Technology, Stanford Univ., Palo Alto, California. (ERIC document No. ED 039777.)Google Scholar
  3. Gronlund, N. (1959). “Sociometry in the Classroom” New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  4. Guba, E. (1965). “Methodological Strategies for Educational Change” Columbus, Ohio: School of Education, Ohio State University. (ERIC document no. ED 011 404.)Google Scholar
  5. Guba, E. (1965) “The Impending Research Explosion and Educational Practice” Columbus, Ohio: College of Education, Ohio State University. (ERIC document no. ED 011 405.)Google Scholar
  6. Halpert, H. P. (1969). Communications as a basic tool in promoting utilization of research findings. In “Program Evaluation in the Health Fields” H. Schulbert, A. Sheldon, and F. Baker, eds.) New York: Behavioral Publications.Google Scholar
  7. Hayelock, R. (1973). “The Change Agent's Guide to Innovation in Education” Englewoods Cliffs, New Jersey: Education Technology.Google Scholar
  8. Kerlinger, F. (1964). “Foundations of Behavioral Research” New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  9. Lin, N. (1968). Innovative methods for studying innovation in education and an illustrated analysis of structural effects on innovation diffusion. Paper presented at conference on the Diffusion of Educational Ideas, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. (ERIC document no. ED 017 741.)Google Scholar
  10. Paisley, W. (1969). “Perspective on the Utilization of Knowledge” Palo Alto, Calif.: California Institute for Communication Research, Stanford University. (ERIC document no. ED 037 094.)Google Scholar
  11. Steinhoff, C., and Owens, R. (1968). “Impact of Research Findings and Recommendations in Urban School Districts: A Case Analysis” New York: Division of Teacher Education, City University of New York. (ERIC document no. ED 042 231.)Google Scholar
  12. Stufflebeam, D. (Ed.) (1971). Educational evaluation and decision-making. Phi Delta Kappa, Bloomington, Indiana.Google Scholar
  13. Van Dalen, D., and Meyer, W. (1966). “Understanding Educational Research: An Introduction” New York: McGraw-Hill Series in Education.Google Scholar
  14. Worthen, B., and Sanders, J. (1973). “Educational Evaluation: Theory and Practice” Worthington, Ohio: Jones Publ.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© APS Publications, Inc. 1976

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lynn H. Willett
    • 1
  1. 1.Elgin Community CollegeElgin

Personalised recommendations