Does the EUA Institutional Evaluation Programme Contribute to Quality Improvement?

Autor/inn/en	Tavares, Diana Amado; Rosa, Maria Joao; Amaral, Alberto
Titel	Does the EUA Institutional Evaluation Programme Contribute to Quality Improvement?
Quelle	In: Quality Assurance in Education: An International Perspective, 18 (2010) 3, S.178-190 (13 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0968-4883
DOI	10.1108/09684881011058632
Schlagwörter	Institutional Evaluation; Quality Control; Content Analysis; Educational Quality; Followup Studies; Research Reports; Achievement Gains; Educational Assessment; Educational Indicators; Foreign Countries; Meta Analysis; Program Effectiveness; Professional Associations; Evaluation Research + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Qualitätskontrolle; Inhaltsanalyse; Quality of education; Bildungsqualität; Follow-up studies; Kontaktstudium; Research report; Forschungsbericht; Achievement gain; Leistungssteigerung; Education; assessment; Bewertungssystem; Educational indicato; Bildungsindikator; Ausland; Meta-analysis; Metaanalyse; Evaluationsforschung
Abstract	Purpose: This paper aims to reflect on the relevance of the Institutional Evaluation Programme (IEP) of the European University Association (EUA) to universities' quality improvement. It aims to analyse IEP follow-up reports to determine whether the programme contributes to the development of a quality improvement culture. Design/methodology/approach: The structure and contents of 22 follow-up reports were analysed to assess the IEP programme. All reports were subject to content analysis using adequate software (NVivo 8 with a 242 nodes tree), the main goal being to evaluate progress made since the original evaluation. Findings: The reports analysed and the work by other authors show that IEP can constitute a useful approach towards the universities' quality improvement. IEP evaluations generally give a precise account of problems faced by each university, identifying its strong and weak points, opportunities and threats, and presenting clear recommendations and suggestions for improvement. If properly discussed inside the university, these evaluations can form the basis for an improvement plan. Research limitations/implications: In general, follow-up teams recognise the difficulty to distinguish changes caused directly by EUA teams' recommendations from others caused by external pressures. Practical implications: The follow-up process has as its main rationale the idea that a second review can assist a university evaluating progress made since the original evaluation. The reports analysed show that changes have always happened to a certain extent after the first evaluation. Originality/value: This paper makes a contribution to the understanding of the effects of institutional evaluation over institutional quality culture. (Contains 2 tables.) (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Emerald. One Mifflin Place Suite 400, Harvard Square, Cambridge, MA 02138. Tel: 617-576-5782; e-mail: america@emeraldinsight.com; Web site: http://www.emeraldinsight.com
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10