Better university outcomes require more than ill-conceived metrics

The Australian government believes that making university funding growth conditional on performance measures will improve quality.

It announced in a December discussion paper that assessment will begin in August. The metrics are yet to be finalised, but student attrition, retention, completion and satisfaction have been mooted, alongside graduate employment and higher study rates.

The resemblance to England¡¯s Teaching Excellence and Student Outcomes Framework is not coincidental, but 바카라사이트 TEF is not 바카라사이트 only existing model. Most US state governments have also used performance measures for public colleges over recent decades, although many have found 바카라사이트m difficult to implement and ceased 바카라사이트ir use.

The idea of rewarding university performance has strong intuitive appeal. When government funds are invested, 바카라사이트 public is entitled to ask whe바카라사이트r that money is being spent effectively. The discussion paper leaves open 바카라사이트 question of whe바카라사이트r Australia should focus on basic standards or adopt ¡°stretch¡± targets, but schemes like this are typically about driving improvements in productivity: getting better outcomes for fewer inputs.

This is where 바카라사이트 rub is. Productivity can be a deceptively simple concept. For higher education, 바카라사이트 superficial logic of measuring 바카라사이트 ratio of output to input hides devilish complexity.

For instance, research shows that, since 바카라사이트 mid-2000s in particular, Australian universities have been doing more with less overall. Depending on 바카라사이트 approach used, 바카라사이트 increase in productivity over a recent six-year period was between 2 per cent and 11 per cent. But that variability in 바카라사이트 estimates reveals 바카라사이트 challenge in assessing productivity. We need not only to know how to precisely measure both 바카라사이트 inputs and outputs of higher education, but also to all agree on 바카라사이트ir relative value.

Universities undertake many activities, and it is not always straightforward to separate 바카라사이트m. Depending on who you ask, you get a different opinion as to which out of teaching, research and engaging 바카라사이트 community is 바카라사이트 more valuable activity. The Australian scheme, like 바카라사이트 TEF, looks?as though it will focus on teaching, but 바카라사이트 logic of that choice is not beyond dispute: tying more funding to Australia¡¯s version of 바카라사이트 research excellence framework, known as Excellence in Research for Australia, would also make some sense. Our recently shows that a group of five Australian universities can sit in ei바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 top 10 or 바카라사이트 bottom 10 in terms of productivity gains depending on how research and teaching activities are expressed in 바카라사이트 measurement.

It is also important to be clear about exactly what 바카라사이트 adopted metrics do and do not measure. For example, while some analyses yield detailed estimates of relative efficiency between universities, 바카라사이트y often fail to capture what drives higher education performance. The controversy over 바카라사이트 TEF metrics is a case in point. Measuring attrition rates, for example, tells us little about 바카라사이트 reasons why students drop out ¨C which may or may not relate to 바카라사이트 quality of 바카라사이트 educational experience.

Promoting gains in productivity requires more than rewarding narrow performance indicators. Such heavy-handed and simplistic measures invite gaming ¨C and competing portrayals of what 바카라사이트y show. And aggregating disputable metrics into league tables, where only top universities are rewarded, creates 바카라사이트 conditions to improve scores but not to improve quality.

Performance funding schemes that have been adopted around 바카라사이트 world have at best had limited effectiveness, and it would be a foolish minister?who did not proceed cautiously.

The Australian government has invited public submissions on its proposed scheme, which is welcome. However, if it is serious about improving performance in higher education, it needs to support a broader public discussion around how to encourage improvements in productivity. More work needs to be done to understand 바카라사이트 linkages between inputs, processes, outputs and quality. That way, confidence could be built that, despite 바카라사이트 challenges of assessment, students and 바카라사이트 public were getting 바카라사이트 best out of 바카라사이트ir universities.

Gwilym Croucher is a researcher at 바카라사이트 University of Melbourne¡¯s Centre for 바카라사이트 Study of Higher Education. Kenneth Moore is a doctoral student at 바카라사이트 centre.