ISSN:0951-5224    

DOI:10.1111/j.1468-2273.1995.tb01682.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1995

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

AbstractThe issue of the quality of teaching in higher education is in the process of becoming a matter of greater public interest than hitherto. This paper concerns the evidence on which quality can be assessed. Drawing on the relevant literature from both the secondary and tertiary sectors of education, it reviews the types of evidence which are available. A critical analysis is offered of the extent to which each isolates teaching quality from distinct variables such as student characteristics and assessment standards. It is argued that quantitative approaches do not currently offer potential to assess teaching quality and are unlikely to do so given the current structure of higher education. The greatest promise lies in the external scrutiny recently instituted by the Higher Education Funding Councils and the Higher Education Quality Council. It is recommended that this scrutiny would be further strengthened by integrating the functions of these two authorities and by phasing out the use of numerical assessment scales in favour of wholly qualitative reporting.

ISSN:0951-5224    

DOI:10.1111/j.1468-2273.1995.tb01683.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1995

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

AbstractThe question ‘What is a graduate?’ is under scrutiny from Government, employers and the higher education community itself. There are two current approaches—one originating within the philosophy of higher education, one emerging from the demands of employers and the focus on ‘core skills’—which might appear to have something to offer to the debate but which when first examined seem hard to reconcile and both of them difficult to translate into ‘threshold standards’. However, more detailed examination suggests the possibility of a new synthesis which could, if supported by further research and action by the Higher Education community collectively, answer the question to the satisfaction of all stakeholders whilst preserving essential ac

ISSN:0951-5224    

DOI:10.1111/j.1468-2273.1995.tb01684.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1995

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

AbstractThis paper examines issues in the debate on quality assurance in the English system of higher education as they have developed between the Further and Higher Education Act of 1992 and the review proposed by the Secretary of State at the end of 1994. The main focus is on the development by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) of its method of quality assessment and the call for the restoration of ‘self‐regulation’ in such matters to the institutions. The role of the institutions in developing the methods adopted by the Funding Council is outlined, and the chief criticisms of its effects evaluated. The paper concludes by reviewing options for change in the immediate future and the conditions that will have to be met. It is argued that systems could undoubtedly be improved, but that key elements of ‘self‐regulation’ have already been won in the continuation of external

ISSN:0951-5224    

DOI:10.1111/j.1468-2273.1995.tb01685.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1995

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

Reviews in this articles:Researching the ResearchersThe Research Foundations of Graduate Education: Germany, Britain, France, United States, Japan, Burton R. Clark (Ed.)Reviewing the Scottish TraditionThe Revival of the Democratic Intellect, Andrew Lockhart WalkerQuality and HeresyThe Quest for Quality: sixteen forms of heresy in higher education, Sinclair Goodlad

ISSN:0951-5224    

DOI:10.1111/j.1468-2273.1995.tb01686.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1995

数据来源: WILEY