Performance budgeting in higher education: The case of the freie universität berlin

Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education

Volumn 6, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 80-86

  Hübner, Peter ^a   Rau, Einhard ^a  

^a FREIE UNIVERSITÄT BERLIN   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33745451511     PISSN: 13603108     EISSN: 14607018     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13603100220148234     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. Hochschulrektorenkonferenz (1998) Evaluation. State of the art report on quality assessment and quality development in German universities (Bonn, Hochschulrektorenkonferenz).
2. Leibenstein, H. (1978) On the Basic Proposition of X-efficiency Theory. American Economic Review, 69(2), pp.328—334.
3. Schmidtlein, FA. (1999) Assumptions underlying performance-based budgeting. Tertiary Education and Management, 5(2), pp. 159—174.
4. Taylor, J. (2001) Efficiency by Performance Indicators? Evidence from Australian Higher Education. Tertiary Education and Management, 7 (1), pp. 41—55.
5. Ashworth, K.H. (1994) Performance-Based Funding in Higher Education. The Texas Case Study. Change, Nov/Dec.
6. Banta, T.W (ed) (1986) Performance Funding in Higher Education: A Critical Analysis of Tennessee’s Experience (Boulder, CO, National Center for Higher Education Management systems).
7. Henkel, M. (1998) Evaluation in Higher Education: conceptual and epistemological foundation. European Journal of Education, 33(3), pp. 285—297.
8. Layzell, D.T. (1998) Linking Performance to Funding Outcomes for Public institutions of Higher Education: the us experience. European Journal of Education, 33 (1), pp. 103—111.
9. Neave, G. (1998) The Evaluative State Reconsidered. European Journal of Education, 33 (3), pp. 265—284.
10. Readings, B. (1996) The University in Ruins (Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press).
11. Vroeijenstijn, A.I. (1994) Improvement and Accountability (London, Jessica Kingsley).