Benchmarking effectiveness in the educational development of three finnish universities using a multidimensional evaluation model (MdE)

International Journal of Public Administration

Volumn 31, Issue 10-11, 2008, Pages 1182-1207

  Ojala, Ilpo ^a   Vartiainen, Pirkko ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VAASA   (Finland)

Author keywords

Bench marking; Educational development; Effectiveness; MdE; Multidimensional evaluation model; Quality of learning

Indexed keywords

EID: 49849106820     PISSN: 01900692     EISSN: 15324265     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01900690801973295     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Bledsoe, K. L. and Graham, J. A. (2005) The use of multiple evaluation approaches in program evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 26:3, pp. 302-303.
2. See also Torres, R. T. and Preskill, H. (2001) Evaluation and organizational learning: Past, present and future. American Journal of Evaluation, 22:3, pp. 387-395.
3. See Ojala, I. and Vartiainen, P. (2006) Kolmen yliopiston opetuksen kehittamistoiminnan vaikuttavuus-Lapin yliopiston, Lappeenrannan teknillisen yliopiston ja Vaasan yliopiston opetuksen kehittamistoiminnan vaikuttavuuden benchmarking -arviointi, KKA, Tampere
4. See also Scriven, M (2001) Evaluation: Future tense. American Journal of Evaluation, 22:3, pp. 301-307.
5. See Ojala, I (2003) Managerialismi ja oppilaitosjohtaminen, pp. 10-13. Vaasan yliopisto, Vaasa
6. See also Hodgkinson, M. and Brown, G. (2003) Enhancing the quality of education: A case study and some emerging principles. Higher Education, 45, pp. 337-338.
7. (1998) Oppimisen ja laadun kiasma, pp. 31-33. Tampere University Press, Vammala
8. Romainville, M. (1999) Quality evaluation of teaching in higher education. Higher Education in Europe, pp. 415-416.
9. See Scott, W. R (1995) Institutions and organizations, Sage, Thousand Oaks, London, CA, New York
10. Pounder, J. S. (2000) Evaluating the relevance of quality to institutional performance assessment in higher education. Evaluation, 6:1, pp. 66-67.
11. Hamalainen, K. (1993) Laadun arviointi yliopistollisessa taydennyskoulutuksessa. Aikuiskasvatus, pp. 238-242.
12. See Bolton, R. N and Drew, J. (1994) Linking customer satisfaction to service operations and outcomes. Service quality: New directions in theory and practice, pp. 176-178. Sage, Thousand Oaks, London, and New Delhi
13. Shadish, W. R. (1998) Evaluation theory is who we are. American Journal of Evaluation, 19:1, pp. 12-13.
14. Vartiainen, P. (2004) The legitimacy of evaluation-A comparison of Finnish and English institutional evaluations of higher education, Peter Lang, Frankfurt am Main
15. Camp, R. C. (1989) Lar av de basta! Benchmarking i tio steg, pp. 61-65. Studentlitteratur, Lund
16. See for example Vartiainen, P (2001) Mita on projektiarviointi? Pohdintaa projektiarvioinnin tieteellisesta ja metodisesta genesiksesta. Nakokulmia projektiarviointiin, pp. 24-27. Finnpublishers, Tampere
17. See also Lorentsen, A (2001) Promoting Internet-Based teaching and learning worldwide. Higher Education in Europe, pp. 515-517.
18. Vedung, E. (1997) Public policy and program evaluation, p. 35. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick and London
19. Foss Hansen, H. (2005) Choosing evaluation models. A discussion on evaluation design. Evaluation, 11:4, pp. 448-451.
20. Bledsoe, K. L. and Graham, J. A. (2005) The use of multiple evaluation approaches in program evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 26:3, pp. 302-303.
21. See for example Oakley, A (2004) The researcher's agenda for evidence. Evaluation and Research in Education, 18:1, pp. 13-15.