Higher Education

, Volume 40, Issue 3, pp 313–330 | Cite as

Developing curriculum evaluation research in higher education: Process, politics and practicalities

  • Carole Leathwood
  • David Phillips

Abstract

Demands for greater accountability, globalcompetition, and concern about standards have allcontributed to the increasing interest in evaluationin universities in the UK. At the same time, bothpedagogic research and teacher development in highereducation are gaining prominence.

This paper describes the initial development of aprogramme of systematic curriculum evaluation researchwithin a `new' university. The focus of the research is a newundergraduate curriculum which emphasises graduateoutcomes and incorporates the development of core`capabilities' within the subject context. Our taskhas been to develop a longitudinal programme ofresearch that will combine both a summative evaluationof educational outcomes with formative evaluation oflearning processes to inform continued curriculumdevelopment.

Questions of performance indicators, measurement, andeducational outcomes all come under scrutiny in acontext of multiple purposes and stakeholders, themicropolitics of the university and wider debatesabout the purpose and effectiveness of undergraduateeducation. This paper explores these issues and theirimplications for the development of a curriculumevaluation strategy, describing the initial stages ofthe multi-level longitudinal design that is emerging.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adelman, C., Jenkins, D. et al. (1980). 'Rethinking case study: Notes from the Second Cambridge Conference', in Simons, H. (ed.), Towards a Science of the Singular. Norwich: Centre for Applied Research in Education, University of East Anglia.Google Scholar
  2. Apple, M. (1993). Official Knowledge: Democratic Education in a Conservative Age. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Astin, A.W. (1993). What Matters in College? Four Crucial Years Revisited. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  4. Ball, S. (1990). Politics and Policy Making in Education: Explorations in Policy Sociology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Barnett, R. (1996). 'The evaluation of the higher education system in the United Kingdom', in Cowen, R. (ed.), World Yearbook of Education 1996: The Evaluation of Higher Education Systems. London: Kogan Page, pp. 144–158.Google Scholar
  6. Barnett, R. (1997). Higher Education: A Critical Business. Buckingham: SRHE & Open University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Coe, R. and Murdoch, K. (1999). Working with Alis. Durham: Curriculum Evaluation and Management Centre, University of Durham.Google Scholar
  8. Cohen, L. and Manion, L. (1994). Research Methods in Education. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Deem, R. (1998). ' “New Managerialism” and higher education: The management of performances and cultures in universities in the United Kingdom', International Studies in Sociology of Education 8(1), 47–70.Google Scholar
  10. ESRC (Economic and Social Research Council) (2000). Influence or Irrelevance: Can Social Science Improve Government? Lecture by Rt. Hon. David Blunkett, UK Secretary of State for Education and Employment, 2nd February 2000. London: ESRC.Google Scholar
  11. Gibbs, G. (1992). Improving the Quality of Student Learning. Bristol: Technical and Educational Services Ltd.Google Scholar
  12. Griffiths, M. (1998). Educational Research for Social Justice: Getting Off the Fence. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Guba, E. and Lincoln, Y. (1989). Fourth Generation Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Harland, J. (1996). 'Evaluation as Realpolitik', in Scott, D. and Usher, R. (eds), Understanding Educational Evaluation. London: Routledge, pp. 91–105.Google Scholar
  15. Henkel, M. (1997). 'Academic Values and the University as Corporate Enterprise', Higher Education Quarterly 51(2), 134–143.Google Scholar
  16. Johnes, J. and Taylor, T. (1990). Performance Indicators in Higher Education. Buckingham: SRHE and the Open University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Jones, L. and Moore, R. (1993). 'Education, competence and the control of expertise', British Journal of the Sociology of Education 14(4), 385–397.Google Scholar
  18. Kember, D., Charlesworth, M., Davies, H., McKay, J. and Stott, V. (1997). 'Evaluating the effectiveness of educational outcomes: Using the study process questionnaire to show that meaningful learning occurs', Studies in Educational Evaluation 23(2), 141–157.Google Scholar
  19. Knox, W.E., Lindsay, P. and Kolb, M. (1993). Does College Make a Difference? Long Term Changes in Activities and Attitudes. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  20. Leathwood, C. (1998). Opportunities, Knowledge, Skills and 'the Intangibles': Graduate Perceptions of Degree Outcomes, unpublished report. London: University of North London.Google Scholar
  21. Marton, F. and Saljo, R. (1976). 'On Qualitative differences in learning: Outcome and process', British Journal of Educational Psychology 46, 4–11.Google Scholar
  22. Mentkowski, M. and Strait, M. (1983). A Longitudinal Study of Student Change in Cognitive Development, Learning Styles, and Generic Abilities in an Outcome-Centered Liberal Arts Curriculum. Milwaukee: Alverno College.Google Scholar
  23. Mentkowski, M. (1990). Issues in the Analysis of Change in Higher Education Assessment. Paper prepared for the Fifth National Conference on Assessment in Higher Education. Milwaukee: Alverno Productions.Google Scholar
  24. Mentkowski, M. (1991). 'Creating a context where institutional assessment yields educational improvement', The Journal of General Education 40, 255–283.Google Scholar
  25. Murphy, R., Burke, P., Gillespie, J., Rainbow, R. and Wilmut, J. (1997). The Key Skills of Students Entering Higher Education. Nottingham: University of Nottingham.Google Scholar
  26. NCIHE (1997). Higher Education in the Learning Society (The Dearing Report). London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  27. Oates, T. (1992). 'Core skills and transfer: Aiming high', Educational and Training Technology International 29(3), 227–239.Google Scholar
  28. Patton, M.Q. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Newbury Park, CA & London: Sage.Google Scholar
  29. Patton, M.Q. (1997). Utilization-Focused Evaluation, 3rd edn. Thousand Oakes and London: Sage.Google Scholar
  30. Reynolds, D., Creemers, B. Stringfield, S. and Teddlie, C. (1998). 'Climbing an educational mountain: Conducting the International School Effectiveness Research Project (ISERP)', in Walford, G. (ed.), Doing Research about Education. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  31. Richardson, J.T.E. (1990). 'Reliability and replicability of the approaches to studying questionnaire', Studies in Higher Education 15, 155–168.Google Scholar
  32. Slee, R. (1998). 'Introduction: School effectiveness for whom?', in Slee, R., Weiner, G. and Tomlinson, S. (eds), School Effectiveness for Whom? Challenges to the School Effectiveness and School Improvement Movements. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  33. Schon, D. (1991). The Reflective Practitioner. Avebury: Ashgate Publications.Google Scholar
  34. Smith, R. and Sachs, J. (1995). 'Academic work intensification: Beyond postmodernism', in Smith, R. and Wexler, P. (eds), After Post-Modernism: Education, Politics and Identity. London: Falmer Press, pp. 225–240.Google Scholar
  35. Smyth, J. and Dow, A. (1998). 'What's wrong with Outcomes? Spotter planes, action plans and steerage of the educational workplace', British Journal of Sociology of Education 19(3), 291–303.Google Scholar
  36. Spours, K. and Hodgson, A. (1996). Value-Added and Raising Attainment: A Formative Approach. London: Institute of London.Google Scholar
  37. Stenhouse, L. (1975). An Introduction to Curriculum Research and Development. London: Heineman Educational.Google Scholar
  38. Thackwray, B. (1997). Effective Evaluation of Training and Development in Higher Education. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  39. Times Higher Education Supplement, T. (1998). 'Editorial', The Times Higher Education Supplement, November 13, p. 14.Google Scholar
  40. Trow,M. (1994). Managerialism and the Academic Profession: Quality and Control. London: Open University.Google Scholar
  41. Tysome, T. (1998). 'Message from the Ministry', The Times Higher Educational Supplement, November 6, p. 3.Google Scholar
  42. University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate (1996). Meno Thinking Skills Service. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
  43. Weiner, G. (1993). 'Ethical practice in an unjust world: Educational evaluation and social justice', in Blackmore, J. and Kenway, J. (eds), Gender Matters in Educational Administration and Policy. London: Falmer Press, pp. 116–124.Google Scholar
  44. Welch, A.R. (1998). 'The cult of efficiency in education: Comparative reflections on the reality and the rhetoric', Comparative Education 34(2), 157–175.Google Scholar
  45. Yorke, M. (1998). 'Assessing capability', in Stephenson, J. and Yorke, M. (eds), Capability and Quality in Higher Education. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carole Leathwood
    • 1
  • David Phillips
    • 1
  1. 1.University of North LondonUK

Personalised recommendations