Developing Institutional Indicators: The Role of Institutional Research (original) (raw)
Related papers
Assessing institutional performance in higher education: a managerial perspective
Higher Education, 1981
Although many institutions are expending considerable effort in attempts to assess institutional performance and to utilize the results in improving performance, there are many impediments to the success of these endeavours. These include conceptual problems with the notion of institutional performance, inadequacies in the current measurement techniques and judgement procedures, and the mis-match between the results produced and management's information requirements. Institutional management in higher education has unique characteristics which give rise to particular information needs. The existing approaches to institutional evaluation vary in their ability to provide information meeting management's requirements.
Slicing the Pie: Institutional Research, Assessment, and Student Affairs Research
New Directions for Institutional Research, 2000
Student affairs research and institutional research functions often exist in different worlds, even within the same college or university. Even when these functions operate in a cooperative or collaborative mode, basic differences in perspective and purpose present challenges to optimizing their value in improving the operations and services provided by their institutions. The similarities and differences between institutional research and research in student affairs became evident when we attended the annual meeting of our state institutional research association. In the opening session, a representative of the National Center for Education Statistics discussed changes in reporting requirements, in particular, the new format for racial and ethnic reporting. Although many of the institutional researchers in the audience discussed and thought about the difficulties in counting and reporting students within various ethnic categories and how we might track these data historically, the student affairs researcher found himself thinking along very different lines. His thoughts focused on the development of racial identity as a part of overall student development. As part of acquiring an identity during college, students develop a sense of their culture and ethnicity. It is important that they be able to identify themselves culturally regardless of whether they can fit comfortably into a limited number of categories. At a session later in the day, another presenter discussed a project that assessed how many times students change majors. Once again, although the discussion focused on the significance of changing majors to enrollment reporting and management, departmental resource allocation, and student retention, the student affairs researcher found himself thinking about how
Journal of Business and Social Review in Emerging Economies, 2021
The objective of the study was to develop a questionnaire named IPQ (Institutional Performance Questionnaire) that measures the institutional performance of higher educational institutions. The scale comprised 11 subscales: Mission Statement and Goal (5 items), Planning and Evaluation (3 items), Organization & Governance, (3 items), Integrity (3 items), Faculty (3 items), Students (2 items), Institutional Resources (3 items), Academic Programs and Curricula (3 items), Public Disclosure and Transparency (2 items), Assessment & Quality Assurance (8 items), and Student Support Services (3 items). In total, 25 faculty members of the universities were selected by multistage stratified sampling, response to the questionnaire. The questionnaire was pilot tested and the Cronbach's alpha for the entire questionnaire was .951; for each subscale, alpha ranged from .623 to 0.823. Exploratory factor analysis was utilized to establish the construct validity of institutional performance in hig...
Institutional Evaluation: Can It Contribute to Improving University Performance
Vestes, 1982
Austra!ian universities, like their counterparts in other western countries, are increasingly operating under financial constraints which have accentuated the need for improved planning and administration. These financial pressures have stimulated interest in techniques for assessing system, institutional, and sub-unit performance. Following the report of the Williams Committee with its recommendations for extending research into institutional and system periormance 1 , and the establishment of the Evaluative Studies Program by the Tertiary Education Commission 2 , most universities are engaging in evaluative studies intended to yield information which will assist endeavours to improve institutional performance. Some of the Australian and overseas experience with institutional evaluation and review has been reported by Clarke and BirP, Holdaway4, Calvert 5 , and Harman and Johnston".
Institutional effectiveness in higher education has become an increasingly relevant and vital topic for scholars from different educational institutions around the globe. The purpose of this paper is to present an empirical model with 32 core indicators that makes it possible to measure and hence improve the outcomes of an institution's mission in terms of research, planning, and effectiveness. The institutional effectiveness model will certainly help educational institutions, in general and those who operate in the UAE in particular, to know how students and community stakeholders perceive delivery of the institution's mission. The Model has been tested at Al Khawarizmi International College -UAE over a number of years, and has proved to facilitate provision of outcome-based assessment for internal decision-making and continuous quality improvement. The paper also provides future directions to further integrate other factors that contribute to the overall effectiveness process and improve the functionality of the system.
Assessing and Improving Institutional Effectiveness
1983
Information to promote assessment of organizational effectiveness in colleges and universities is presented, along with an exercise to rank the effectiveness of 10 institutions. The exercise uses three types of criteria to indicate effectiveness: subjective ratings, data about studen.s and activities, and institutional capacity and financial health. In ranking the colleges, the respondent is to senerate three rank-order lists base on the perspectives of three different individuals: a high school senior who is choosing a college, a highly qualified Ph.D. who is selecting a * * 44
Institutional logic and scholars' reactions to performance measurement in universities
Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal
PurposeEmploying institutional logic and institutional work as its theoretical framework, this study analyzes scholars' reactions to performance measurement systems in academia.Design/methodology/approachLarge datasets were collected over time, combining both quantitative and qualitative elements. The data were gathered from a two-wave survey in 2010 (966 respondents) and 2015 (672 respondents), conducted among scholars performing teaching- and research-oriented tasks in three Finnish universities.FindingsThe analysis showed statistically significant changes over time in the ways that the respondents were positioned in three major groups influenced by different institutional logics. This study contributes to the international debate on institutional change in universities by showing that in Finnish universities, emerging business logics and existing professional logics can co-exist and be blended among a growing group of academics. The analysis of qualitative open-ended answers ...
2000
This study investigated the opinions of college faculty and administrators regarding the purpose, control, and process of performance evaluation, hypothesizing that job orientations and expectations would influence their opinions-that administrators would favor an economic model emphasizing authoritative and quantitative measures; teachers would favor an information model emphasizing networking relationships; and researchers would favor a hybrid approach. Questionnaires sent to three Canadian universities and completed by administrators, professors, instructors, and researchers yielded 116 usable replies. The questionnaire's 54 items focused on: purposes of performance evaluation; control and process of performance evaluation; standards; validity of performance indicators; overall opinions on the issues of purposes, control, and process, as well as satisfaction with existing performance evaluation systems; and demographics. Results indicated that job orientation and expectations of respondents influenced their views on purposes, control sources, and implementation procedures of performance evaluation. Administrators favored an economic model; teachers favored an information model; and researchers favored a hybrid approach. Respondents believed evaluation should be annual for nontenured faculty and every two to three years for tenured faculty. There was substantial agreement among respondents about the appropriate list of performance indicators. Data tables and diagrams of rank-ordered means are appended. (Contains 19 references.) (SM) Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document.