The Implementation of Progress Files in Higher Education: Reflection as National Policy

Progress files, involving personal development planning (PDP), are becoming a feature of many higher education systems internationally. In the UK they will become mandatory for all undergraduate students from 2005. This presents a major implementation challenge, because while reflection has been a cornerstone of practice in some areas of higher education for a considerable time, its generalisation as national policy changes its discursive location. The paper presents findings from a case study of the implementation of PF in one UK Higher Education Institution (HEI). It reports on how staff in one institution understand PF in the context of national policy, and on how they interpret the challenges they face in facilitating reflection for all students. The paper argues that pedagogical innovations take on a different meaning when applied to the system as a whole.     

Practical Considerations When Using Benchmarking for Accountability in Higher Education

The qualitative study on which this article is based examined key individuals’ perceptions, both within a research university community and beyond in its external governing board, of how to improve benchmarking as an accountability method in higher education. Differing understanding of benchmarking revealed practical implications for using it as an accountability tool. A change model is presented for enhancing the effectiveness of benchmarking in higher education communities.Sue D. Achtemeier received the B.A. in mathematics and computer science with High Honors and the M.S. in mathematics from Florida State University and the Ph.D. in Higher Education from the University of Georgia. She has held teaching positions in Illinois and Georgia and is now Assistant Director for Institutional Effectiveness for the University of Georgia with particular interest in accreditation and accountability. Ronald D. Simpson is Professor Emeritus of Higher Education and Science Education and Director Emeritus of the Office of Instructional Support and Development at the University of Georgia. He holds degrees in the biological sciences and in science education from the University of Tennessee and the University of Georgia and continues to teach and advise doctoral students in UGA’s Institute of Higher Education.     

Juggling multiple accountability systems: how three principals manage these tensions in Ontario,Canada

Accountability in education is not new. Schools have always been accountable in one way or another to the communities they serve, regardless of the policy environment of the time (Elmore, The Educational Forum, 69:134–142, 2005). This article explores how three principals from Ontario, Canada manage the tensions of multiple accountability systems in their work. Findings indicate that the principals were able to find ways to be accountable to a variety of communities and ideals by prioritizing and honoring local needs and beliefs within the larger provincial mandate. Principals could not ignore the various accountability pressures; indeed, their success hinged on the ability to negotiate them. This delicate balancing act requires school principals to develop skills necessary to successfully juggle these competing demands.     

Assessment activities at large,research universities

Assessment and outcomes measurement is receiving considerable attention in higher education nationwide. But what are colleges and universities doing and calling assessment? To answer these and other questions, a telephone survey was conducted with a sample of large, research universities. Responses to the survey are presented and discussed in this paper. Results indicated limited university involvement in activities commonly associated with the current assessment “movement,” i.e., measures of added value or student progress and growth. Instead, much of the reported activities are “traditional” testing and evaluation activities such as placement testing and student evaluation of instruction. In sum, assessmentis evaluation at large, research universities.     

Single‐sex classes in co‐educational schools

This research investigated social and academic outcomes from single‐sex classrooms in a Tasmanian coeducational government primary school. Interviews, observations and surveys formed the basis of the evidence. Teachers, parents and children reported positive benefits from the class organisation, but these differed according to gender. Staff identified increased confidence and higher self‐esteem among girls, whereas boys developed increased motivation and more commitment to schoolwork. Teachers and parents noted that boys’ accountability and self‐discipline improved. Teachers adopted different strategies from those used with mixed‐gender classes and gained higher levels of satisfaction from teaching, attributable to increased children’s time ‘on task’. Paradoxically, standardised school testing indicated no increase in academic achievements. However, there may be an extended lag between establishing changed social relationships and measurable academic outcomes, suggesting that if the new class structure is to achieve its full potential, it should be established early in primary school and continue to adolescence.