Abstract
This chapter is concerned with the development of modern higher education quality assurance systems and how in recent years these systems have interacted with both national and global institutional ranking. Among various perspectives employed is that of organisational effectiveness which provides a theoretical orientation for the volume. Quality assurance, accountability and rankings can be viewed as different forms of assessment of organisational effectiveness. The chapter focuses particularly on recent fast-moving political and economic currents that are forcing substantial changes to existing quality assurance and accountability systems. These currents are being driven by a combination of stakeholder and government concerns about academic standards, global competition for education services and the impact of ranking systems. These recent changes are set within the broader context of the development of modern quality assurance since the 1980s. Unlike many discussions of quality assurance, this chapter sees assessments of research quality and impact as key elements of quality assurance. Accountability, however, is considered only in the narrow context as one purpose of quality assurance.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Attwood, R. (2009). Engage with quality assurance or face state takeover, scholars told. Times Higher Education, 19–25 November.
Australian Government. (2008). Review of Australian higher education: Final report (2008). Canberra: Australian Government.
Australian Research Council. (2009). Excellence in research for Australia (ERA) initiative. Canberra: Australian Research Council.
Department of Education, Science and Training. (2007). Research quality framework: Assessing the quality and impact of research in Australia: RQF submission specifications September 2007. Canberra: Department of Education, Science and Training.
Geuna, A., & Martin, B. (2003). University research evaluation and funding: An international comparison. Minerva, 41, 277–304.
Harman, G. (1998). The management of quality assurance: An international review of international practice. Higher Education Quarterly, 52(4), 345–364.
Harman, G. (2004). Australia’s system of quality assurance for higher education: Development, key elements and current operations. Higher Education Forum (Research Institute for Higher Education, Hiroshima University), 1, 117–134.
Harman, G. (2009). National assessments of research excellence and impact: UK and Australian experience. In P. Clancy & D. Dill (Eds.), The research mission of the university: Policy reforms and institutional response (pp. 153–176). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Harman, G., & Meek, V. L. (2000). Repositioning quality assurance and accreditation in Australian higher education. Evaluation and investigations program, higher education division. Canberra: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.
Harvey, L. (2006). Understanding quality. In European Universities Association, Bologna (Ed.), Handbook: making Bologna work. Berlin: Raabe Academic publishers.
Hazelkorn, E. (2007). Impact and influence of league tables and ranking systems on higher education decision-making. Higher Education Management and Policy, 19(2), 87–110.
Higher Education Funding Council of England. (2009a). Research excellence framework: Second consultation on the assessment and funding of research. Bristol: Higher Education Funding Council of England.
Higher Education Funding Council of England. (2009b). Report of the sub-committee for teaching quality and the student experience, Bristol.
House of Commons Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Committee. (2009). Students and universities: Eleventh report of session 2008–09, Vol. 1. London.
Hubbard, P. (2008). HE consultation and our future: Research excellence framework: Consultation event 10, 11 and 17 January 2008. Bristol: Higher Education Funding Council of England.
Institute for Higher Education Policy. (2009). Issue brief: Impact of college rankings on institutional decision making: Four country case studies. Washington, DC: Institute for Higher Education Policy.
Jones, E., Pearce, M., & Karmel, T. (2001). The Australian higher education quality assurance framework. In G Harman (Ed.), Quality assurance in higher education: Proceedings of the international conference on quality assurance in higher education: Standards, mechanisms and mutual recognition, Bangkok, Thailand, 8–10 November 2000. Bangkok: Ministry of University Affairs of Thailand and UNESCO Principal Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, 116–130.
Lane, B. (2009). Reform rationale. The Australian, 18 November.
Marginson, S., & van der Wende, M. (2006). To rank for be ranked: The impact of global rankings in higher education. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(3/4), 306–329.
Middllehurst, R., & Woodhouse, D. (1995). Coherent systems for external quality assurance. Quality in Higher Education, 1(3), 257–268.
Rhoades, G., & Sporn, B. (2002). Quality assurance in Europe and the U.S.: Professional and political economic framing of higher education policy. Higher Education, 43(3), 355–390.
Romzek, B. (2000). Dynamics of public sector accountability in an era of reform. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 66(1), 21–44.
Sachs, J. (1994). Strange yet compatible bedfellows: Quality assurance and quality improvement. Australian Universities Review, 37, 1.
Salmi, J. (2008). The challenge of establishing world-class universities. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Santiago, P., Tremblay, K., Basri, E., & Arnal, E. (2008). Tertiary education for the knowledge society, Vol. 1 Special features: Governance, funding quality. Paris: OECD.
Stella, A., & Woodhouse, D. (2006). Rankings of higher education institutions. Melbourne: Australian Universities Quality Agency.
Tapper, T., & Filappakou, O. (2009). The world class league tables and the sustaining reputation in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 31(1), 55–66.
Tertiary Education Commission. (2008). Performance based research fund: 2012 quality evaluation. Consultation paper 1. Wellington: Tertiary Education Commission.
Thakur, M. (2008). The impact of ranking systems on higher education and its stakeholders. Journal of Institutional Research, 13(1), 83–96.
Tremblay. (2009). OECD: Diverse processes, common objectives. University World News, 4 May.
Trow, M. (1993). Managerialism and the academic profession: The case of England. Studies of Higher Education and Research, 4, 1–23.
Usher, A., & Salbvino, M. (2007). A global survey of university ranking and league tables. Higher Education in Europe, 32(1), 5–15.
Van Vught, F. (1994). Western Europe and North America. In A. Craft (Ed.), International developments in assuring quality in higher education. London: Falmer.
Woodhouse, D. (1999). Quality and quality assurance. In Quality and internationalisation in Higher Education. Paris: OECD.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Harman, G. (2011). Competitors of Rankings: New Directions in Quality Assurance and Accountability. In: Shin, J., Toutkoushian, R., Teichler, U. (eds) University Rankings. The Changing Academy – The Changing Academic Profession in International Comparative Perspective, vol 3. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1116-7_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1116-7_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-1115-0
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-1116-7
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)