Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Self and peer appraisal in higher education

  • Published:
Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper applies the mathematical technique of Data Envelopment Analysis to the problem of appraisal in Higher Education. The technique can be understood as an idealised self and peer appraisal: evaluating others in the same way that we would optimally evaluate ourselves relative to those others. The technique is applied to examples of student and staff appraisal. Although the main focus of this article is on the technique itself (its rationale, the prerequisites for use, and the insights that it yields), we also discuss the wider implications of having and using such a technique to assist appraisal.

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

  • Adolphson, D.L., Cornia, G.C., and Walters, L.C. (1991). ‘A unified framework for classifying DEA models’, in Bradley, H.E. (ed.),Operational Research '90. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beasley, J.E. (1990). ‘Comparing university departments’,OMEGA, International Journal of Management Science 18(2), 171–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bessent, A.M., and Bessent, E.W. (1980). ‘Determining the comparative efficiency of schools through Data Envelopment Analysis’,Educational Administration Quarterly 16(2), 57–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bessent, A.M., Bessent, E.W., Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., and Thorogood, N.C. (1983). ‘Evaluation of educational program proposals by means of DEA’,Educational Administration Quarterly 19(2), 82–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boisot, M.H. (1986). ‘Markets and hierarchies in a cultural perspective’,Organization Studies 7(2), 135–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carson, K.P., Cardy, R.L., and Dobbins, G.H. (1991). ‘Performance appraisal as effective management or deadly management disease’,Group and Organization Studies 16(2), 143–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doyle, J.R., and Green, R.H. (1991). ‘Comparing products using Data Envelopment Analysis’,OMEGA, International Journal of Management Science 19(6), 631–638.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doyle, J.R., and Green, R.H. (1994). ‘Efficiency and cross-efficiency in DEA: Derivations, meanings and uses’,Journal of the Operational Research Society, 45(5), 567–578.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnes, G., and Johnes, J. (1993). ‘Measuring the research performance of UK economics departments: An application of Data Envelopment Analysis’,Oxford Economics Papers 45, 332–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, R. (1985).Linear and Non-linear Programming: An Introduction to Linear Methods in Mathematical Programming. Chichester, UK: Ellis Horwood.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Solvic, P. and Tversky, A. (1982).Judgement Under Uncertainty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleinmutz, B. (1990). ‘Why we still use our heads instead of formulas: towards an integrative approach”,Psychological Bulletin 107(3), 296–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nisbett, R.E., and Ross, L. (1980).Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgement. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norman, M., and Stoker, B. (1991).Data Envelopment Analysis: The Assessment of Performance. Chichester, UK: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunamaker, T.R. (1985). ‘Using Data Envelopment Analysis to measure the efficiency of non-profit organizations: a critical evaluation’,Managerial and Decision Economics 6(1), 50–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oral, M., Kettani, O., and Lang, P. (1991). ‘A methodology for collective evaluation and selection of industrial R&D projects’,Management Science 37(7), 871–885.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roll, Y., and Golany, B. (1933). ‘Alternative methods of treating factor weights in DEA’,OMEGA, International Journal of Management Science 21(1), 99–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, L. (1977). ‘The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings’, in Berkowitz, L. (ed.),Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (vol. 10). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sexton, T.R., Silkman, R.H., and Hogan, A.J. (1986). ‘Data Envelopment Analysis: critique and extensions’, in Silkman, R.H. (ed.),Measuring Efficiency: An Assessment of Data Envelopment Analysis. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, P., and Mayston, D. (1987). ‘Measuring efficiency in the public sector’,OMEGA International Journal of Management Science 15(3), 181–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stillwell, W.G., Barron, F.H., and Edwards, W. (1983). ‘Evaluating credit applications: a validation of multiattribute utility weight elicitation techniques’,Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 32, 87–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Times Higher Educational Supplement (1993). 14 May.

  • Tomkins, C.R., and Green, R.H. (1978). ‘An experiment in the use of Data Envelopment Analysis for evaluating the efficiency of UK university departments of accounting’,Financial Accountability and Management 4(2), 147–164.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Management, University of Bath, BA2 7AY, Bath, UK

    John R. Doyle & Rodney H. Green

Authors
  1. John R. Doyle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rodney H. Green
    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

Doyle, J.R., Green, R.H. Self and peer appraisal in higher education. High Educ 28, 241–264 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01383731

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01383731

Keywords

Search

Navigation