Academic staff perceptions of improving higher education evaluation : a case-study in the University of Hong Kong

Abstract

Driven by higher education quality assurance and accountability in recent decades, higher education evaluations have attracted momentous publics' attention. Internal evaluation and external evaluation varied with different emphases as well as distinct functions. However, external evaluation brought pressures and burdens to universities by focusing on outcomes and excessively intervening internal one. The overall aim of this study is to give suggestions which help improve the higher education evaluation system in Hong Kong.

This qualitative case-study explored evaluation purposes and evaluation impacts in The University of Hong Kong. Eleven interviews with academic staff were conducted to answer the research question "what are academic staff's opinions on how and why conducting internal and external evaluation?" Findings indicate the both internal and external are necessary because of the positive impacts on academic staff's development. This study also confirms the differences between internal and external evaluation in terms of the purpose and emphasis. To support the emergence of eminent evaluation, evaluator should provide clear purpose and mission statements as well as determine appropriate method and instrument. According to the data, evaluators need pay attention to data interpretation, fairness insurance, and stimulating motivation. Moreover, the value of improvement should be highlighted in evaluation practice and evaluation culture. This study also identifies areas for further research such as the comparison between Hong Kong and other higher education evaluation systems.