The systemic approach as an instrument to evaluate higher education systems: Opportunities and challenges

IF 2.9 4区 管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
J. Aparicio, D. Rodríguez, J. Zabala‐Iturriagagoitia
{"title":"The systemic approach as an instrument to evaluate higher education systems: Opportunities and challenges","authors":"J. Aparicio, D. Rodríguez, J. Zabala‐Iturriagagoitia","doi":"10.1093/RESEVAL/RVAB012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article aims to provide a systemic instrument to evaluate the functioning of higher education systems. Despite systemic instruments have had a strong impact on the management of public policy systems in fields such as health and innovation, higher education has not been widely discussed in applying this type of instrument. Herein lies the main gap that we want to close. The ultimate purpose of the evaluation instrument introduced here is thus to provide information for decision-makers, so these can identify the strengths/weaknesses in the functioning of their respective higher education systems from a systemic perspective. To achieve the previous goal, we apply the methodological guidelines of the integrative review of the literature. An integrative review of the literature was chosen because it guides the extraction of quantitative evidence from the literature and its classification, with the purpose of integrating the results into an analytical framework. This resulting analytical framework is what we have labelled as the systemic evaluation instrument. The article makes three contributions to the literature. First, the different types of higher education institutions considered in the literature and the higher education systems analysis scales are evidenced. Second, we identify the capacities and functions examined by the literature so that higher education institutions and higher education systems can fulfil their missions. Third, a systemic evaluation framework for higher education institutions and higher education systems is presented. The article concludes with a discussion of the opportunities and challenges associated to the implementation of such a systemic framework for policymaking.","PeriodicalId":47668,"journal":{"name":"Research Evaluation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/RESEVAL/RVAB012","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/RESEVAL/RVAB012","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article aims to provide a systemic instrument to evaluate the functioning of higher education systems. Despite systemic instruments have had a strong impact on the management of public policy systems in fields such as health and innovation, higher education has not been widely discussed in applying this type of instrument. Herein lies the main gap that we want to close. The ultimate purpose of the evaluation instrument introduced here is thus to provide information for decision-makers, so these can identify the strengths/weaknesses in the functioning of their respective higher education systems from a systemic perspective. To achieve the previous goal, we apply the methodological guidelines of the integrative review of the literature. An integrative review of the literature was chosen because it guides the extraction of quantitative evidence from the literature and its classification, with the purpose of integrating the results into an analytical framework. This resulting analytical framework is what we have labelled as the systemic evaluation instrument. The article makes three contributions to the literature. First, the different types of higher education institutions considered in the literature and the higher education systems analysis scales are evidenced. Second, we identify the capacities and functions examined by the literature so that higher education institutions and higher education systems can fulfil their missions. Third, a systemic evaluation framework for higher education institutions and higher education systems is presented. The article concludes with a discussion of the opportunities and challenges associated to the implementation of such a systemic framework for policymaking.
作为评估高等教育体系的工具的系统方法:机遇与挑战
本文旨在提供一个系统的工具来评估高等教育系统的功能。尽管系统工具对卫生和创新等领域的公共政策系统管理产生了强烈影响,但高等教育在应用这类工具方面尚未得到广泛讨论。这就是我们想要缩小的主要差距。因此,这里介绍的评估工具的最终目的是为决策者提供信息,以便他们可以从系统的角度确定各自高等教育系统运作的优势/弱点。为了达到前面的目标,我们采用文献综合综述的方法指南。选择对文献进行综合评价是因为它指导从文献中提取定量证据及其分类,目的是将结果整合到分析框架中。由此产生的分析框架就是我们称之为系统评价工具的东西。这篇文章对文学有三点贡献。首先,证明了文献中所考虑的不同类型的高等教育机构和高等教育系统分析量表。其次,我们确定了文献所考察的能力和功能,以便高等教育机构和高等教育系统能够履行其使命。第三,提出了高等教育机构和高等教育体系的系统评价框架。文章最后讨论了与实施这样一个系统性的政策制定框架相关的机遇和挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Research Evaluation
Research Evaluation INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
18.20%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Research Evaluation is a peer-reviewed, international journal. It ranges from the individual research project up to inter-country comparisons of research performance. Research projects, researchers, research centres, and the types of research output are all relevant. It includes public and private sectors, natural and social sciences. The term "evaluation" applies to all stages from priorities and proposals, through the monitoring of on-going projects and programmes, to the use of the results of research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信