Innovation, professionalisation and evaluation: implications for quality management in higher education

References

• Abraham, Y.G., 2017, ‘The neoliberal new public management influence on the Swedish higher education’, Karlstads Universitets Pedagogiska Tidskrift, 13(1), pp. 45–58.
   Google Scholar
• Abrami, P.C., d’Apollonia, S. & Cohen, P.A., 1990, ‘Validity of student ratings of instruction: what we know and what we do not’, Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(2), pp. 219–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, C., 2008, ‘The end of theory: the data deluge makes the scientific method obsolete’, Wired, 06/2008. Available at https://www.wired.com/2008/06/pb-theory/ (accessed 2 March 2021).
   Google Scholar
• Bain, K., 2004, What the Best College Teachers Do (Cambridge, Harvard University Press).
   Google Scholar
• Bringselius, L., 2017, ‘Trust-based governance. A framework’ [in Swedish]. Available at https://portal.research.lu.se/portal/files/23859088/2017_04_10_Louise_Bringselius_PM_om_TBS.pdf (accessed 10 March 2021).
   Google Scholar
• Connelly, S. & Vanderhoven, D., 2018, ‘The craft of evaluative practice: negotiating legitimate methodologies within complex interventions’, Evaluation, 24(4), pp. 419–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cuganesan, S., Guthrie, J. & Vranic, V., 2014, ‘The riskiness of public sector performance measurement: a review and research agenda’, Financial Accountability & Management, 30(3), pp. 279–302.
   Google Scholar
• Dewe, B. & Otto, H.-U., 2011, ‘Professionalität’, in Otto, H.-U. & Thiersch, H. (Eds.), 2011, Handbuch Soziale Arbeit, fourth edition, pp. 1143–53 (München and Basel, Reinhardt).
   Google Scholar
• DiMaggio, P. & Powell, W., 1983, ‘The iron cage revisited. Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields’, American Sociological Review, 48, pp. 147–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Downing, L. & Rogan, S., 2016, ‘Evaluation as an integrated management tool: embedding an evaluator into a program’, Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 16(2), pp. 4–14.
   Google Scholar
• DuCette, J. & Kenney, J., 1982, ‘Do grading standards affect student evaluations of teaching? Some new evidence on an old question’, Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(3), pp. 308–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Floridi, L., 2014, The Fourth Revolution: How the infosphere is reshaping human reality (Oxford, Oxford University Press).
   Google Scholar
• Ginsburg, A. & Rhett, N., 2003, ‘Building a better body of evidence: new opportunities to strengthen evaluation utilization’, American Journal of Evaluation, 24(4), pp. 489–98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huber, M.T. & Hutchings, P., 2005, The Advancement of Learning: Building the teaching commons (San Francisco, Jossey-Bass).
   Google Scholar
• Hutchings, P., Huber, M.T. & Ciccone, A., 2011, The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Reconsidered: Institutional integration and impact (San Francisco, Jossey-Bass).
   Google Scholar
• Krücken, G., 2007, ‘Organizational fields and competitive groups in higher education. Some lessons from the Bachelor/Master reform in Germany’, Management Revue, 18, pp. 187–203.
   Google Scholar
• Leiber, T., 2017, ‘Computational social science and big data: a quick SWOT analysis’, in Pietsch, W., Wernecke, J. & Ott, M. (Eds.), 2017, Berechenbarkeit der Welt? Philosophie und Wissenschaft im Zeitalter von Big Data, pp. 289–303 (Wiesbaden, Springer VS).
   Google Scholar
• Leiber, T., 2022, ‘Justifying, contextualising and operationalising performance indicators of learning and teaching: the role of theories and practice of learning and teaching’, Quality in Higher Education, 28(1).
   Google Scholar
• Luhmann, N., 2002, Das Erziehungssystem der Gesellschaft (Frankfurt/Main, Suhrkamp).
   Google Scholar
• Martin, F. & Ndoye, A., 2016, ‘Using learning analytics to assess student learning in online courses’, Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 13(3), pp. 1–22.
   Google Scholar
• Mazzocchi, F., 2015, ‘Could Big Data be the end of theory in science? A few remarks on the epistemology of data‐driven science’, EMBO Report, 16(1), pp. 1250–55.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moniruzzaman, A.B. & Hossain S.A., 2013, ‘Comparative study on agile software development methodologies’, Global Journal of Computer Science and Technology, 13(7), pp. 5–18.
   Google Scholar
• Nutley, S., Walter, I. & Davies, H.T., 2003, ‘From knowing to doing. A framework for understanding the evidence-into-practice agenda’, Evaluation, 9(2), pp. 125–48.
   Google Scholar
• Patton, M.Q., 2008, Utilization-focused Evaluation, fourth edition (London, Sage).
   Google Scholar
• Pausits, A., Zeng, G. & Abebe, R.T., 2014, New Public Management in Higher Education: International overview and analysis (Krems, Austria, Donau-Universität). Available at http://donau.booktype.pro/new-public-management-in-higher-education-international-overview-and-analysis/_info/ (accessed 23 February 2021).
   Google Scholar
• Piciotto, R., 2020, ‘Evaluation and the Big Data challenge’, American Journal of Evaluation, 41(2), pp. 166–81.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pleschova, G., Simon, E., Quinian, K.M. & Roxa, T., 2012, The Professionalisation of Academics as Teachers in Higher Education, Science Position Paper (Strasbourg, European Science Foundation).
   Google Scholar
• Pohlenz, P., 2020, ‘Higher education management in the time of Corona: reconsidering the predominant paradigm in the light of the crisis’, International Dialogues on Education, 7(1), pp. 116–22.
   Google Scholar
• Pohlenz, P., 2021, ‘Evaluation von Lehre und Studium in der Hochschule 4.0‘, in Deimann, M. & v. Treeck, T. (Eds.), 2021, Digitalisierung der Hochschullehre. Aspekte und Perspektiven der Transformation, pp. 115–30 (Berlin, DUZ Medienhaus Verlag).
   Google Scholar
• Rheinbacher, P., 2019, ‘Institutionelle Innovation zwischen Evaluation und Evolution. Qualitätsmanagement als Treiber und als Getriebener im Veränderungsgefüge hochschulischer Institutionen’, in Harris-Hümmert, S., Mitterauer, L. & Pohlenz, P. (Eds.), 2019, Systeme im Wandel: Hochschulen auf neuen Wegen? pp. 31–48 (Münster, Waxmann).
   Google Scholar
• Rodríguez Groba, A., Barreirosy, B., Lama, M., Barujel, A. & Mucientes, M., 2014, ‘Using a learning analytics tool for evaluation in self-regulated learning’, Conference Paper IEEE Frontiers in Education, Madrid 2014, Proceedings, pp. 2484–91 (New York, IEEE).
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, E.M., 2003, Diffusion of Innovations, fifth edition (New York, Free Press).
   Google Scholar
• Schimank, U., 2015, ‘Identitätsbedrohungen und Identitätsbehauptung: Professoren in reformbewegten Universitäten‘, in Groddeck, V. & Wilz, S.M. (Eds.), 2015, Formalität und Informalität in Organisationen, pp. 277–96 (Wiesbaden, VS-Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften).
   Google Scholar
• Serrador, P. & Pinto, J.K., 2015, ‘Does Agile work? –A quantitative analysis of agile project success’, International Journal of Project Management, 33, pp. 1040–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seyfried, M. & Pohlenz, P., 2018, ‘Assessing quality assurance in higher education: quality managers’ perceptions of effectiveness’, European Journal of Higher Education, 8(3), pp. 258–71.
   Google Scholar
• Shulman, L.S., 2000, ‘From Minsk to Pinsk: why a scholarship of teaching and learning?’, Journal of Scholarship in Teaching and Learning, 1(1), pp. 48–53.
   Google Scholar
• Simons, H., 2004, ‘Utilizing evaluation evidence to enhance professional practice’, Evaluation, 10(4), pp. 410–24.
   Google Scholar
• Stehr, N. & Meja, V., 2020, ‘Modern societies as knowledge societies’, in Tomasi, L. (Ed.), 2020, New Horizons in Sociological Theory and Research. The frontiers of sociology at the beginning of the twenty-first century, pp. 154–73 (London, Taylor & Francis).
   Google Scholar
• Stensaker, B. & Norgard, J.D., 2001, ‘Innovation and isomorphism: a case study of university identity struggle 1969–99ʹ, Higher Education, 42, pp. 473–92.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sustainable Quality Enhancement in Higher Education Learning and Teaching (SQELT-PI), 2020, ‘SQELT comprehensive performance indicator set’, Erasmus+ Strategic Partnership SQELT. Available at https://www.evalag.de/fileadmin/dateien/pdf/forschung_international/sqelt/Intellectual_outputs/sqelt_perfindicset4_o9_201127_final_sec.pdf (accessed 2 March 2021).
   Google Scholar
• Theall, M., Abrami, P.C. & Mets, L.A. (Eds.), 2001, The Student Ratings Debate: Are they valid? How can we best use them? (San Francisco, Jossey-Bass).
   Google Scholar
• Whitchurch, C., 2012, Reconstructing Identities in Higher Education: The rise of ‘Third Space’ professionals (London, Routledge).
   Google Scholar
• Winks, L., Green, N. & Dyer, S., 2020, ‘Nurturing innovation and creativity in educational practice: principles for supporting faculty peer learning through campus design’, Higher Education, 80, pp. 119–35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yarbrough, D.B., Shulha, L.M., Hopson, R.K. & Caruthers, F.A., 2010, The Program Evaluation Standards. A guide for evaluators and evaluation users, third edition., Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation (London, Sage).
   Google Scholar