A conceptual framework for evaluating higher education institutions
International Journal of Educational Management, ISSN: 0951-354X, Vol: 30, Issue: 6, Page: 989-1002
2016
- 42Citations
- 39Usage
- 310Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations42
- Citation Indexes42
- 42
- CrossRef16
- Academic Citation Index (ACI) - airiti1
- Usage39
- Abstract Views39
- Captures310
- Readers310
- 310
Article Description
Purpose – Performance evaluation is a topic that has been researched and practiced extensively in business organizations but has received scant attention in higher education institutions. A review of literature revealed that context, input, process, product (CIPP) model is an appropriate performance evaluation model for higher education institutions. However, little guidance exists for choosing appropriate metrics and benchmarks in implementing the CIPP model. The purpose of this paper is to develop a framework using CIPP model for performance evaluation of higher education institutions. Design/methodology/approach – To achieve the purpose of the study, a review of literature was conducted to identify an appropriate evaluation model. Then metrics and benchmarks framework were formed based on practical approaches used in a large university in the USA. Findings – Nine perspectives in performance evaluation using the CIPP model and their application in higher education institutions were developed and discussed. The discussion provides examples, relative prevalence including frequency of usage, advantages and limitations of each of the nine perspectives of performance evaluation in higher education institutions. An actual application of the suggested CIPP model in the USA largest university, by student enrollment, was provided. Implications for institutional assessment and continuous improvement for higher education institutions were made. Originality/value – The study provides a practical framework, model and guidelines that can be used by higher education institutions to evaluate and enhance their performances and better prepare students to effectively work in society.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84982947922&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ijem-09-2015-0120; http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/10.1108/IJEM-09-2015-0120; http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full-xml/10.1108/IJEM-09-2015-0120; http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/IJEM-09-2015-0120; https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IJEM-09-2015-0120/full/html; https://nsuworks.nova.edu/hcbe_facarticles/1058; https://nsuworks.nova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2093&context=hcbe_facarticles
Emerald
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know