The Evaluative State as Policy in Transition: A Historical and Anatomical Study

  • Guy Neave
Chapter
Part of the Springer International Handbooks of Education book series (SIHE, volume 22)

Over the past two decades in Western Europe, the Evaluative State has grown, is growing though whether, like the power of one of Britain's more unfortunate monarchs, George III, ‘it ought to be diminished’ is a question as delicate as it is misplaced. In this chapter, I will explore the historic forces behind this particular phenomenon with a view to getting some purchase over where it is likely to lead us. And this in turn engages one of the most fundamental developments that higher education in Europe has to grapple with today — namely, the rise of what at different times and across different disciplinary perspectives has been variously described as ‘the European dimension’ (Huisman et al., 2000) as the intergovernmental layer (Maassen & Neave, 2007: 135 ff) or even amongst the more metaphysically inclined within the scholarly community, as the ‘supra governmental’ dimension in the affairs of higher education (Maassen & Olsen, 2007: 3–24).

By and large, the Evaluative State on the one hand and the so-called Bologna Process on the other have been treated as separate and watertight issues — and, to some extent, indeed they are. The former quite obviously took shape and matured within in that classical setting of higher education policy, namely within the Nation State. The latter, however, represents a new and very certainly a permanent additional dimension or level of decision-making that both ties in with, whilst at the same time forming, a species of ‘supra ordinate’ layer beyond what for the past two centuries served as the highest level of aggregation in the evolution of the universities in Europe.

Keywords

High Education High Education System Individual Institution High Education Policy Institutional Performance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bauer, M. & Kogan, M. (1997). Evaluation systems in the UK and Sweden: Successes and difficulties. European Journal of Education, 32(2), 129–143.Google Scholar
  2. Bauer, M. (1988), “Evaluation in Swedish higher education: recent trends and the outlines of a model,” European Journal of Education,23, 1-2 pp. 25–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clark, B. R. (1983). Higher Education Organization: Cross-national Perspectives. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  4. De Groof, J. (Ed.) (1994). Subsidiarity and Education. Aspects of comparative, education, law. Leuven/ Amersfoort, Paul von der knapp.Google Scholar
  5. De Miguel Diaz, M. (1999). Calidad de la Enseñanza universitaria y excelencia academica. Oviedo, Universidad de Oviedo, Servicio de Publicaciones.Google Scholar
  6. Glenny, L. A. (Ed.) (1979). Funding Higher Education: A Six-Nation Analysis. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  7. El-Khawas, E. (1992). Are buffer organizations doomed to fail?: Inevitable dilemmas and tensions. Higher Education Policy, 5(3), 18–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Huisman, J., Maassen, P., & Neave, G. (Eds.) (2001). Higher Education and the Nation State. Oxford, Elsevier-Pergamon for IAU.Google Scholar
  9. Huitema, D., Jeliazkova, M., & Westerheijden, D. F. 2002 Phases, levels and circles in policy development The cases of higher education and environmental quality assurance. Higher Education Policy, 15(2), 197–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. HSV Rapport (2005). On looking forward to innovation, consolidation and progress: A short saga of organizational anticipation. Annex to the Final Report of the International Advisory Board. Rapport 2005:38R The Evaluation Activities of the National Agency for Higher Education in Sweden. Final report by the International Advisory Board. Stockholm: Högskoleverket (Xerox), 10 pp.Google Scholar
  11. Jeliazkova, M. & Westerheijden, D. (2002). Systemic adaptation to a changing environment: Towards a next generation of quality assurance models. Higher Education, 44(3–4), 433–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kehm, B. & Lazendorff, U. (2006). Reforming University Governance: Changing Conditions for Research in Four European Countries. Bonn: Lemmens.Google Scholar
  13. Kogan, M. (2006). Review of Neave, Nybom & Blückert's The European Research University: an historical parenthesis? Higher Education Policy, 19(3).Google Scholar
  14. Kwikkers, P et al. (2005). Evenwicht zonder sturing Wegen voor nieuw hoger onderwijs en wetenschap (deel 1). den Haag: Sdu-Uitgevers.Google Scholar
  15. Lindqvist, S. (2006). The R&D production model: A Breug(h)elesque alternative. In G. Neave, T. Nybom, & K. Bluckert (Eds.), The European Research University: An Historical Parenthesis?New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 77–90.Google Scholar
  16. Lub, A. (2003). Accreditation in Flanders and the Netherlands: A joint initiative, IAU Newsletter, April– June, p. 5.Google Scholar
  17. Maassen, P. & Neave, G. (2007) The Bologna Process: an intergovernmental policy perspective. In P. Maassen & J. P. Olsen (Eds.), University Dynamics and European Integration. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 135–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Maassen, P. & Olsen, J. P. (Eds.) (2007). University Dynamics and European Integration. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  19. Mungaray-Lagarda, A. (2002). Re-engineering Mexican higher education toward economic development and quality: The XXI century challenge. Higher Education Policy, 15(4), 391–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Neave, G. (1996) The evaluation of the higher education system in France. In R. Cowen (Ed.), World Yearbook of Education 1966: The Evaluation of Systems of Higher Education. London: Kogan Page, pp. 66–81.Google Scholar
  21. Neave, G. (2001) The European dimension in higher education: An excursion into the modern use of historical analogues. In M. Huisman & G. Neave (Eds.), Higher Education and the Nation State. Oxford: Elsevier Pergamon, pp. 13–73.Google Scholar
  22. Neave, G. (2002). The stakeholder perspective historically explored. In J. Enders & O. Fulton (Eds.), Higher Education in a Globalising World: International Trends and Mutual Observations. Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 17–38.Google Scholar
  23. Neave (2003). “The Bologna Declaration: Some of the Historic Dilemmas posed by the Reconstruction of the Community in Europe's systems of Higher Education”, Educational Policy, vol. 17, No. 1, January & March 2003, pp, 141–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Neave, G. (2004a). Higher education policy as orthodoxy: Being one tale of doxological drift, political intention and changing circumstances. In D. Dill, B. Jongbloed, A. Amaral, & P. Teixeira (Eds.), Markets in Higher Education: Rhetoric or Reality?Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  25. Neave, G. (2004b). The temple and its guardians: An excursion into the rhetoric of evaluating higher education. The Journal of Finance and Management in Colleges and Universities, 1(1) (Tokyo), 212–227.Google Scholar
  26. Neave, G. (2006a). Setting the estimated time of arrival: Goals, purposes and progress in making Europe competitive and attractive. Keynote presentation to the Conference The Lisbon Agenda and the Way Ahead, Lisbon, July 10–11, 2006, Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation, 23pp.Google Scholar
  27. Neave, G. (2006b). On incorporating the university. Higher Education Policy, 19(2), 129–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Neave, G. (2006c). The Evaluative State and Bologna: Old wine in new bottles or simply the ancient practice of ‘Coupage’? Higher Education Forum, 3, March 2006, Hiroshima (Japan), Hiroshima University Research Institute for Higher Education, pp. 27–46.Google Scholar
  29. Neave, G. & van Vught, F. (1994). Prometeo Encadenado: Estado y educación superior en Europa. Barcelona: GedisaGoogle Scholar
  30. Neave, G., Nybom, T., & Blückert, K. (Eds.) (2006). The European Research University: A Historical Parenthesis?New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  31. Ovodenko, A. (2004). Private higher education in the Russian Federation. In N. V. Varghese (Ed.), Private Higher Education UNESCO/IIEP: ParisGoogle Scholar
  32. Pollitt, C. (2002). New public management in international perspective: An analysis of impacts and effects. In K. McLaughlan, S. P. Osborne, & E. Ferlie (Eds.), New Public Management: Current Trends and Future Prospects. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  33. Smale, W. & Gounko, T. (2006). Who chooses the tune? An analysis of the new initiatives in Russian higher education. Higher Education Policy, 19(3), 319–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Scheele, J. P. Maassen, P. A. M., & Westerheijden, D. F (Eds.) (1998). To Be Continued.…Follow Up of Quality Assurance in Higher Education. The Hague: Elsevier/De Tijdstroom.Google Scholar
  35. Schwartz-Hahn, S. & Westerheijden, D. (2004). Accreditation and Evaluation in the European Higher Education Area. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  36. Staropoli, A. (1987) The Comite National d’Evaluation: Preliminary Results of a French Experiment. European Journal of Education, 22(2), 123–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Teixeira, P., Jongbloed, B., Dill, D., & Amaral, A. (Eds.) (2004) Markets in Higher Education: Rhetoric or Reality?Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  38. Tomusk, V. (2005) Open World and Closed Societies: Essays on Higher Education Policies ‘In Transition’. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  39. Tomusk, V. (2006). Creating the European area of higher education: voices from the periphery. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Trow, M. (1974). The Transition from Elite to Mass Higher Education, Paris, OECD 2 vols.Google Scholar
  41. Trow, M. (1975). The public and private lives of higher education. Daedalus, 104(1), 113–127.Google Scholar
  42. van Vught, F. (1989). Governmental strategies and innovation in higher education. (Higher Education Policy Series. no.7.) London: Jessica Kingsley, 232 p.Google Scholar
  43. de Weert, E. & Enders, J. (2004). The International Attractiveness of the Academic Workplace in Europe. Frankfurt/Main: Gewerkschaft Erziehung und Wissenschaft GEW.Google Scholar
  44. White Paper (2003). The Future of Higher Education. London: Department for Education and Skills.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Guy Neave
    • 1
  1. 1.Centro de Investigacäo de Politicas do Ensino Superior (CIPES)Porto

Personalised recommendations