Evaluation in Higher Education

Introduction

Although there are many different approaches to programme evaluation in higher education, there is nonetheless a general agreement regarding its main objective. Programme evaluation in higher education is the systematic process of obtaining relevant information which is then used to make decisions in regard to different university domains (i.e. research, services, teaching, departments, programmes, etc.). This decision-making process should be based on scientific methodology according to valid and reliable data. In addition, and under the premises of utility, feasibility, propriety, and accuracy, the results obtained should enable institutions to improve practices in order to achieve excellence in their activities and processes (Volkwein et al., 1995).

The implementation of programme evaluation in higher education is difficult for three reasons. First, due to the peculiar characteristics of university context, there is a low degree of institutional autonomy in decision-making, coupled with inefficient communication systems. Second, it is difficult to define programme evaluation in this complex context. Critical groups with different interests (researchers, administrative staff, teachers, students, etc.) have different evaluation objectives, which are not always measurable; it is sometimes difficult to determine who controls the evaluation process. Third, faculty or staff in units being evaluated are often fearful because evaluation can imply cutting back on resources (Ruby, 1990). These difficulties have brought about the need to develop procedures to obtain a continuous flow of relevant and useful information with regard [Page 388]to university input, context, resources, processes, and results.

Main Evaluation Practices in Higher Education

It is difficult to find an evaluation of the whole university; usually, evaluations are applied to specific faculties, departments, or programmes. The following four evaluation practices can be complementary and can even be used at the same time:

• Accreditation, which involves state or regional licensing of qualified colleges and universities to carry out their activities. Usually it is specific to studies and/or programmes. Through this process, predefined standards or criteria of performance are verified within institutions of higher learning.
• Self-studies, involving a process of evaluation through an institution's internal audience with the aim of moving towards a process of self-improvement. These studies stimulate self-observation as well as the detection of weaknesses within the system.
• Formalization of systems of indicators through the operationalization of the institutional objectives, processes, resources, contexts and results into observable quantitative or qualitative variables. By measuring these variables, information is obtained which allows for the assessment of the evaluated areas (Oakes, 1986; Chacón, Pérez-Gil, Holgado & Lara, 2001).
• ‘Peer review’, in which a group of recognized experts in the field of university evaluation is asked to judge the merits of the institution under evaluation (Frazer, 1997).

In practice, a combination of the above evaluation practices are used. Thus, it is often found that an institution may use the peer review process while at the same time indicators are set up and viewed to counteract any possible subjectivity on the part of the peer reviewers. This mixture of evaluative practices implies that there is a high degree of flexibility in the application of different strategies and measurement instruments for obtaining data. The main measurement instruments used in these mixed evaluative practices are interviews, the analysis of written documents, application of systems of categories and field formats, as well as the use of semi-standard and standard evaluation instruments (Porter, 1991).

...