Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
B. Clark (1998)
Creating entrepreneurial universities
P. Blau (2021)
The Organization of Academic Work
L. Harvey, J. Newton (2004)
Transforming quality evaluationQuality in Higher Education, 10
Daniel Lang (2001)
Diversity and Peer Selection: Where Do They Intersect?Tertiary Education and Management, 7
Patrick Callan (1994)
The Gauntlet for Multicampus Systems., 2
T. Banta, C. Blaich (2010)
Closing the Assessment LoopChange: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 43
D. Priest, W. Becker, D. Hossler, E. John (2002)
Incentive-based budgeting systems in public universities
J. Morrison, R. Birnbaum (1983)
Maintaining Diversity in Higher Education.Contemporary Sociology, 14
Daniel Lang, F. Iacobucci, C. Tuohy (2005)
The Political Economy of Performance Funding
Huang Li (2005)
The State and the Market in Higher EducationPeking university education review
Kevin Dougherty, Sosanya Jones, Hana Lahr, Rebecca Natow, L. Pheatt, Vikash Reddy (2014)
Performance Funding for Higher EducationThe ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 655
R. Berdahl (2000)
A View from the Bridge: Higher Education at the Macro-Management LevelThe Review of Higher Education, 24
S. Page, K. Cramer (2000)
Rankings of Canadian Universities, 2000: Buyer BewareCanadian Journal of Education, 25
R. Birnbaum (2000)
Management Fads In Higher Education
Daniel Lang (2005)
“World Class” or The Curse of Comparison?Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 35
A. Darling, Martin England, Daniel Lang, Rosanne Lopers-Sweetman (1989)
Autonomy and control: a university funding formula as an instrument of public policyHigher Education, 18
M. Spence (2002)
Signaling in Retrospect and the Informational Structure of MarketsThe American Economic Review, 92
S. Slezak (2011)
What is Strategy
Kevin Dougherty, Vikash Reddy (2013)
Performance Funding for Higher Education: What Are the Mechanisms What Are the Impacts
J. Helmkamp, J. Ford (1985)
Responsibility center management.Medical group management, 32 5
Daniel Lang (1998)
Rethinking Higher Education
James Scott (1999)
Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed
G. Doherty (1997)
Quality, standards, the consumer paradigm and developments in higher educationQuality Assurance in Education, 5
M. Skolnik (2010)
Quality assurance in higher education as a political processHigher Education Management and Policy, 22
L. Morley (2003)
Quality And Power In Higher Education
T. Banta, C. Blaich (2011)
CLOSING THE ASSESSMENT
M. Trow (1988)
American Higher EducationEducational Researcher, 17
M. Skolnik (1989)
How Academic Program Review Can Foster Intellectual Conformity and Stifle Diversity of Thought and MethodThe Journal of Higher Education, 60
D. Kirp, P. Roberts (2002)
Mr. Jefferson's University Breaks Up.Public Interest
Robert Martin (2011)
The College Cost Disease: Higher Cost and Lower Quality
Daniel Lang (2005)
Formulaic Approaches to the Funding of Colleges and Universities
Van Vught, A. Frans (1994)
Intrinsic and extrinsic aspects of quality assessment in higher education
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to discuss how the province over time has addressed problems that are generic to many jurisdictions in assuring quality: level of aggregation, pooling, definition of new and continuing programs, scope of jurisdiction, role of governors, performance indicators, relationship to accreditation, programs versus credentials, benchmarking and isomorphism. The paper will pay particular attention to the balance between institutional autonomy in promoting quality and innovation in contrast to system-wide standards for assuring quality. The Province of Ontario has had some form of quality assurance since 1969. For most of the period since then, there were separate forms for undergraduate and graduate programs. Eligibility for public funding is based on the assurance of quality by a buffer body. In 2010, after two years of work, a province-wide task force devised a new framework. Design/methodology/approach – The structure of the paper is a series of “problem/solution” discussions, for example, aggregation, pooling, isomorphism and jurisdiction. Findings – Some problems are generic, for example, how to define a “new” program. Assuring quality and enhancing quality are fundamentally different in terms of process. Research limitations/implications – Although many of the problems discussed are generic, the paper is based on the experience of one jurisdiction. Practical implications – The article will be useful in post-secondary systems seeking to balance autonomy and innovation with central accountability and standardization. It is particularly applicable to undifferentiated systems. Social implications – Implications for public policy are mainly about locating the most effective center of gravity between assuring quality and enhancing quality, and between promoting quality and ensuring accountability. Originality/value – The approach of the discussion and analysis is novel, and the results portable.
Quality Assurance in Education – Emerald Publishing
Published: Jul 6, 2015
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.