Comparing the Comparators: How Should the Quality of Education Offered by Online Universities Be Evaluated?

Autor/inn/en	Brasher, Andrew; Whitelock, Denise; Holmes, Wayne; Pozzi, Francesca; Persico, Donatella; Manganello, Flavio; Passarelli, Marcello; Sangrà, Albert
Titel	Comparing the Comparators: How Should the Quality of Education Offered by Online Universities Be Evaluated?
Quelle	In: European Journal of Education, 57 (2022) 2, S.306-324 (19 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Brasher, Andrew) ORCID (Pozzi, Francesca) ORCID (Manganello, Flavio) ORCID (Sangrà, Albert)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0141-8211
DOI	10.1111/ejed.12497
Schlagwörter	Educational Quality; Comparative Education; Reputation; Institutional Evaluation; Meta Analysis; Quality Assurance; Universities; College Choice; Student Attitudes; Institutional Characteristics; Undergraduate Students; Formative Evaluation; Summative Evaluation; Student Characteristics; Virtual Universities + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Quality of education; Bildungsqualität; Vergleichende Erziehungswissenschaft; Meta-analysis; Metaanalyse; Qualitätssicherung; University; Universität; Studienortwahl; Schülerverhalten
Abstract	Comparing universities and courses is of interest to a variety of stakeholders including potential students, policy makers, news and media organisations, ranking providers, and universities themselves. There are a range of existing university ranking schemes that provide comparisons (e.g. Academic Ranking of World Universities) but typically these are designed with face-to-face teaching and learning in mind. There is also a growing number of quality assurance tools and approaches aimed at ensuring the quality of online education This article reports on an analysis of a range of quality assurance systems for online higher education institutions and courses, together with variety of ranking systems targeting conventional universities--with the aim of establishing what they measure, and the metrics used to assess quality. The findings from this analytical study were compared with a meta-analysis of the literature about how students choose their university in order to understand how these instruments influence current student opinion and can be used more proactively by universities themselves. The findings reveal: (1) current ranking systems are of limited value for most potential undergraduate students, particularly with reference to online education; (2) comparison systems that can be of value to students from a variety of different backgrounds are likely to be complex to set up and run; and (3) quality indicators that promote both formative and summative evaluation may be beneficial to both institutions and students. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01