Metrics and Processes for Evaluating Scholarship in Higher Education: Experts’ Critical Reflections on Key Questions

In this final chapter the editors report the results of the international survey of senior academics views about the evaluation of scholarship in HE which they conducted for this book. We recruited a broad international group of senior univer-sity staff who have been involved with the evaluation of academic work in a variety of institutions, disciplines and roles over many years. We contacted over 20 experts, most of whom agreed to help and share their experience and expertise. The experts were asked for their written responses and critical reflections on five key ques-tions about the topic. Their replies suggest that there is no one agreed best measure of academic, teaching or research quality; different indicators highlight different aspects of performance. Some respondents were concerned that there is a tendency for an “uncritical realism” towards quantifiable metrics for evaluations of teaching and research and academic work generally and an assumption that they are objective and based on merit. Regarding the vexed topic of teaching quality assessment by students, one major concern was the use and role of ‘customer satisfaction’ type of student surveys. Several positive features and advantages of employing appropriate metrics for academic evaluation were identified. The methodologies are generally transparent so academics being assessed cannot say they do not know the ‘rules of the game’. Employing international standards to evaluate scholarship exposes academics to a competitive environment fostering their professional development and interna-tional research. Viewing the student role primarily as that of “customers” was over-whelmingly criticized, however. Although students are ‘co-creators’ of learning, most HE institutions now tend to address them as ‘customers’ in their communications, branding and marketing.