Analytic Quality Glossary
A B C D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
Citation
reference: Harvey, L., 2004, Analytic Quality Glossary, Quality
Research International, http://www.qualityresearchinternational.com/glossary/
This is a dynamic glossary and the author would welcome any e-mail
suggestions for amendments or additions.
____________________________________________________________________
Self-assessment is the process of
critically reviewing the quality of ones own performance and provision.
explanatory
context
Self-assessment may be undertaken on an
individual basis or, in the context of external quality review, on a collective basis.
Self-assessment is used interchangeably
with self-evaluation and self-study in
the context of higher education quality. They all involve a process of
self-reflection by the institution or sub-institutional unit being reviewed and
the preparation of a document reflecting that self-reflection.
Some commentators confusingly equate
self-evaluation with internal
evaluation.
analytical
review
Campbell and Rozsnyai, (2002,
p. 133) see it thus:
Self-evaluation: Same as internal evaluation, done by a unit as a form of quality management or in preparation for external evaluation.
CHEA defines self-study as:
Self-study:
The review and evaluation of the quality and effectiveness of an institution's
own academic programs, staffing, and structure, based on standards set by an
outside quality assurance body, carried out by the institution itself.
Self-studies usually are undertaken in preparation for a quality assurance site visit by
an outside team of specialists. Results in a self-study report.
According to the EQUIPE project:
Self-assessment is the basic part of any
assessment. An institution evaluating its own activities formulates its
objectives and tasks, analyses its activities applying different approaches,
reveals its activity problems and foresees the ways of resolving them.
EVA (2004) outline the nature of
self-evaluation as follows:
Self evaluation is an integral part of
any evaluation Ð i.e. EVA has a duty to meet this requirement under the law on
the Danish Evaluation Institute.
The self evaluation has a dual purpose; on
the one hand, it should be used as documentation for the final report and its
recommendations and, on the other hand, it should be seen as an inspiration for
the evaluated educational programme or establishment for quality improvement.
In the self evaluation, the educational establishment has to describe and
assess its own strengths and weaknesses. Normally, the participants
will be the teachers and also the students or the pupils and management. The
self evaluation is based on guidelines prepared
by the project group. The guidelines are always available for the general
public but only in the Danish language.
HEQC (2004, p. 29) defines:
Self-evaluation: Within the context of an audit, self-evaluation refers
to the process by which an institution reviews the effectiveness of its quality
management system for assuring, developing and
monitoring the quality of teaching and learning, research and community
engagement against
the requirements of the HEQCÕs audit criteria and any other quality criteria
that the institution deems relevant.
The self-evaluation process leads to the development of an audit
portfolio by the institution for submission to the HEQC.
associated
issues
Supposedly,
self-assessment documents are self-critical, demonstrating strengths and
weaknesses. However, the extent to which the document shared with reviewers
points to any deficits depends on the perception of the reviewees as to the
consequences of bringing to light any shortcomings.
Éself-evaluation,
in the right context, is useful for encouraging fundamental reviews of
objectives, practices and outcomes. Account after account has indicated how
important self-evaluation is (Karlsen &
Stensaker, 1995; Saarinen, 1995; Rasmussen, 1995; Bazargan, 1999). There remain
questions about the appropriate frequency and depth of self-assessment and the
relevance of different models of self-assessment.
What is clear is that the less threatening the evaluation process the more open,
honestly reflective and useful is the self-evaluation process. (Harvey, 2002)
related terms
source
Bazargan, A. (1999) Introduction to
assessing quality in higher medical education in Iran: challenges and
perspectives, Quality in Higher Education, 5(1), pp. 61Ð68.
Campbell, C. & Rozsnyai, C., 2002, Quality
Assurance and the Development of Course Programmes. Papers on Higher Education Regional
University Network on Governance and Management of Higher Education in South
East Europe Bucharest, UNESCO.
Council For Higher Education
Accreditation (CHEA) 2001, Glossary
of Key Terms in Quality Assurance and Accreditation, http://www.chea.org/international/inter_glossary01.html,
updated 8 May 2001.
Council
on Higher Education, Higher Education Quality Committee (HEQC), 2004, Criteria
for Institutional Audits, April (Pretoria,
Council on Higher Education). Avalable at http://quality.up.ac.za/docs/index.html
Danmarks Evalueringsinstitut [Danish
Evaluation Institute] (EVA), 2004, Home / Knowledge and method / EVA's method /
Self evaluation, http://www.eva.dk/
EQUIPE Project, 2004, Case Study,
Lithuania, by Daiva Dumciuviene of Kaunas University of Technology. Site undate
accessed, October, 2004 http://equipe.up.pt/Casestudies/sg2kaunas.pdf
Harvey, L., 2002, ÔEvaluation for What?Õ, Teaching
in Higher Education, 7(3),
pp. 245Ð264.
Karlsen, R. and Stensaker,
B., 1995, ÔBetween governmental demands and institutional needs: peer
discretion in external evaluationsÑwhat is it used for?Õ, paper presented at
the 17th Annual EAIR Forum, Dynamics in Higher Education: Traditions
Challenged by New Paradigms, Zurich, Switzerland, 27Ð30 August 1995.
Rasmussen, P. (1995) A Danish
approach to quality in education: the case of Aalborg University paper, with
additional comments, presented at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation
and Development (OECD), Programme on Institutional Management in Higher
Education (IMHE) Seminar, at OECD, Paris, 4Ð6 December.
Saarinen, T. (1995)
Systematic higher education assessment and departmental impacts: translating
the effort to meet the need, Quality in Higher Education, 1 (3), pp. 223Ð234.