{"title":"创新、专业化和评估:高等教育质量管理的启示","authors":"P. Pohlenz","doi":"10.1080/13538322.2021.1951452","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT At first sight, discussing the relevance of innovation, professionalisation and evaluation for higher education quality management seems to be redundant. Universities can legitimately be expected to be innovation-friendly, to pursue professionalism in their approaches to teaching and to be appreciative towards an evidence-supported management practice that relies on sound evaluation research methods. At second sight however, things prove to be blurry. For instance, evaluation practice in the field of higher education, with its focus on predefined quality indicators can in the worst case impede teaching innovation that requires more openness and error-tolerance. The paper thus discusses innovation, professionalisation and evaluation as interrelated concepts that can in the best case contribute to an adaptive and agile quality management environment which is context sensitive and creates trust in the employed mechanisms and those who are in charge to perform them.","PeriodicalId":46354,"journal":{"name":"Quality in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Innovation, professionalisation and evaluation: implications for quality management in higher education\",\"authors\":\"P. Pohlenz\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13538322.2021.1951452\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT At first sight, discussing the relevance of innovation, professionalisation and evaluation for higher education quality management seems to be redundant. Universities can legitimately be expected to be innovation-friendly, to pursue professionalism in their approaches to teaching and to be appreciative towards an evidence-supported management practice that relies on sound evaluation research methods. At second sight however, things prove to be blurry. For instance, evaluation practice in the field of higher education, with its focus on predefined quality indicators can in the worst case impede teaching innovation that requires more openness and error-tolerance. The paper thus discusses innovation, professionalisation and evaluation as interrelated concepts that can in the best case contribute to an adaptive and agile quality management environment which is context sensitive and creates trust in the employed mechanisms and those who are in charge to perform them.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46354,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quality in Higher Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quality in Higher Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2021.1951452\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality in Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2021.1951452","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Innovation, professionalisation and evaluation: implications for quality management in higher education
ABSTRACT At first sight, discussing the relevance of innovation, professionalisation and evaluation for higher education quality management seems to be redundant. Universities can legitimately be expected to be innovation-friendly, to pursue professionalism in their approaches to teaching and to be appreciative towards an evidence-supported management practice that relies on sound evaluation research methods. At second sight however, things prove to be blurry. For instance, evaluation practice in the field of higher education, with its focus on predefined quality indicators can in the worst case impede teaching innovation that requires more openness and error-tolerance. The paper thus discusses innovation, professionalisation and evaluation as interrelated concepts that can in the best case contribute to an adaptive and agile quality management environment which is context sensitive and creates trust in the employed mechanisms and those who are in charge to perform them.
期刊介绍:
Quality in Higher Education is aimed at those interested in the theory, practice and policies relating to the control, management and improvement of quality in higher education. The journal is receptive to critical, phenomenological as well as positivistic studies. The journal would like to publish more studies that use hermeneutic, semiotic, ethnographic or dialectical research as well as the more traditional studies based on quantitative surveys and in-depth interviews and focus groups. Papers that have empirical research content are particularly welcome. The editor especially wishes to encourage papers on: reported research results, especially where these assess the impact of quality assurance systems, procedures and methodologies; theoretical analyses of quality and quality initiatives in higher education; comparative evaluation and international aspects of practice and policy with a view to identifying transportable methods, systems and good practice; quality assurance and standards monitoring of transnational higher education; the nature and impact and student feedback; improvements in learning and teaching that impact on quality and standards; links between quality assurance and employability; evaluations of the impact of quality procedures at national level, backed up by research evidence.