Indicators for the Evaluation of Public Engagement of Higher Education Institutions

Journal of the Knowledge Economy

Volumn 5, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 562-584

  Vargiu, Andrea ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SASSARI   (Italy)

Author keywords

Evaluation; Higher education; Indicators; Public engagement; University

Indexed keywords

EID: 84905669056     PISSN: None     EISSN: 18687873     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s13132-014-0194-7     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Aranguren, M. J., & Larrea, M. (2011). Regional innovation policy processes: linking learning to action. Journal of Knowledge Economy, 2(3), 569-585.
2. Bauer, M. W., & Jensen, P. (2011). The mobilization of scientists for public engagement. Public Understanding of Science, 20(1), 3-11.
3. Borofsky, R. (2000). Public anthropology. Where to? What next? Anthropology News, 41(5), 9-10.
4. Boyte, H. C., & Hollander, E. L. (1999). Wingspread declaration on renewing the civic mission of the American research university. Campus Compact.
5. Bozeman, B. (2000). Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory. Research Policy, 29, 627-635.
6. Brady, D. (2004). Why public sociology may fail. Social Forces, 82(4), 1629-1638.
7. Burawoy, M. (2005). For public sociology. American Sociological Review, 70, 4-28.
8. Carayannis, E., & Campbell, D. (2009). 'Mode 3' and 'Quadruple Helix': toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem. International Journal of Technology Management, 46(3-4), 201-234.
9. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Learning. (2007). Elective classification: community engagement 2008 documentation framework. New York: Carnegie Foundation. http://consensus. fsu. edu/bog-fcrc/pdfs2/Carnegie_Community_Engagement_08_Documentation. pdf. Accessed 27 June 2012.
10. Checkoway, B. (2001). Renewing the civic mission of the American Research University. The Journal of Higher Education, 72(2), 125-147.
11. Calhoun C. (2011). Who needs knowledge? Communication, Nov. 4th 2011. Retrieved from http://www. ssrc. org/calhoun/2011/11/04/who-needs-knowledge/. Accessed 27 June 2012.
12. Chessa, S., & Vargiu, A. (2011). Valutazione universitaria e mutamenti istituzionali in Europa. Studi di Sociologia, 1(XLIX), 3-34.
13. Department of Trade and Industry. (2000). Excellence and opportunity: a science and innovation policy for the 21st century. London: Department of Trade and Industry, Office of Science and Technology, HM Government.
14. Duke, C. (2008). University engagement. Avoidable confusion and inescapable contradiction. Higher Education Management and Policy, 20(2), 1-11. doi: 10. 1787/hemp-v20-art17-en. http://dx. doi. org/10. 1787/hemp-v20-art12-en.
15. E3M (2011). Final report of Delphi Study. The E3M Project-European Indicators and Ranking Methodology for University Third Mission. http://www. e3mproject. eu/docs/Delphi-E3M-project. pdf. Accessed 27 June 2012.
16. Ellis, A., Bianchi, G., & Shoop, K. (2008). Service-learning in American higher education: an analysis. Higher Education Forum, 5, 141-150.
17. Furco, A., & Miller, W. (2009). Issues in benchmarking and assessing institutional engagement. New Directions for Higher Education, 147, 47-54.
18. Gleeson, R. E. (2010). The third mission and the history of reform in American higher education. In P. Inman & H. G. Schuetze (Eds.), The community engagement and service mission of universities (pp. 121-137). Leicester: Niace.
19. Garlick, S., & Langworthy, A. (2008). Benchmarking university community engagement: developing a national approach in Australia. Higher Education Management and Policy, 20(2), 1-12. http://dx. doi. org/10. 1787/hemp-v20-art17-en.
20. Gastil, E., & Levine, P. (Eds.). (2005). The deliberative democracy handbook. Strategies for effective civic engagement in the 21st century. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
21. Habermas, J. (1968). Erkenntniss und Interesse. Suhrkamp: Frankfut am Main.
22. Hart A., Northmore S., & Gerhardt C. (2009). Briefing paper: auditing, benchmarking and evaluating public engagement. Bristol, UK: National Co-ordinating Centre for Public Engagement Research Synthesis n° 1. http://talloiresnetwork. tufts. edu/wp-content/uploads/AuditingBenchmarkingandEvaluatingPublicEngagement. pdf. Accessed 27 June 2012.
23. Hazelkorn, E. (2011). Rankings and the reshaping of higher education: The battle for world-class excellence. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
24. Hill, M., & Williamson Hill, L.-V. (2010). Faculty reward system and third mission of colleges and universities. In P. Inman & H. G. Schuetze (Eds.), The community engagement and service mission of universities (pp. 249-260). Leicester: Niace.
25. Holland, B. (2009). Will it last? Evidence of institutionalization at Carnegie classified community engagement institutions. New Directions for Higher Education, 147, 85-98.
26. Jaeger, C. C., Renn, O., Rosa, E. A., & Webler, T. (2001). Risk, uncertainty, and rational action. London: Earthscan.
27. Jasanoff, S. (Ed.). (2004). States of knowledge: the co-production of science and the social order. London: Routledge.
28. Joss, S., & Bellucci, S. (Eds.). (2002). Participatory technology assessment. European perspective. London: Centre for the Study of Democracy.
29. Kehm, B., & Stensaker, B. (Eds.). (2008). University rankings, diversity, and the new landscape of higher education. Rotterdam: Sense.
30. Kellogg Commission. (1999). Taking charge of change: renewing the promise of state and land-grant universities. Washington: W. K. Kellogg Foundation.
31. Martin, B. R. (1996). Technology foresight: capturing the benefits from science-related technologies. Research Evaluation, 6(2), 158-168.
32. Mejlgaard, N., Bloch, C., Degn, L., & Ravn, T. (2012). Monitoring policy and research activities on science in society in Europe (MASIS) final synthesis report. Brussels: European Commission.
33. Mohrman, K. (2010). Public universities and regional development. In P. Inman & H. G. Schuetze (Eds.), The community engagement and service mission of universities (pp. 139-163). Leicester: Niace.
34. Molas-Gallart J., Salter A., Patel P., Scott A., & Duran X. (2002). Measuring third stream activities. Final report to the Russell Group of University, Brighton: UK, SPRU-Science and Technology Policy Research, University of Sussex. http://www2. lse. ac. uk/economicHistory/Research/CCPN/pdf/russell_report_thirdStream. pdf. Accessed 27 June 2012.
35. Neresini, F., & Bucchi, M. (2011). Which indicators for the new public engagement activities? An exploratory study of European research institutions. Public Understanding of Science, 20, 64-79. doi: 10. 1177/0963662510388363.
36. Nichols, L. (Ed.). (2007). Public sociology: the contemporary debate. New Brunswick: Transaction.
37. Nielsen, F. (2004). The vacant 'we': remarks on public sociology. Social Forces, 82(4), 1619-1627.
38. Oecd. (1983). The university and the community. Paris: Oecd.
39. Oecd. (1997). Proposed guidelines for collecting and interpreting technological innovation data: the 'Oslo Manual'. Paris: Oecd.
40. Oecd. (1999). The response of higher education institution to regional needs. Paris: Oecd.
41. Oecd. (2001a). Innovation and the strategic use of IPRs: Issues Paper, DSTI/STP/TIP (2001) 4. Paris: Oecd.
42. Oecd. (2001b). Workshop on the management of intellectual property rights from public research, DSTI/STP/TIP (2001) 11. Paris: Oecd.
43. Oecd. (2001c). Cities and regions in the learning economy. Paris: Oecd.
44. Oecd. (2007). Higher education and regions: globally competitive, locally engaged. Paris: Oecd.
45. Owen, R., Macnaghten, P., & Stilgoe, J. (2012). Responsible research and innovation: from science in society to science for society, with society. Science and Public Policy, 39(6), 751-760. doi: 10. 1093/scipol/scs093.
46. Polanyi, K. (1944). The great transformation. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
47. Polt W., Rammer C., Gassler H., Schibany A., & Schartinger D. (2001). Benchmarking industry-science relations: the role of framework conditions. Vienna/Mannheim: AT/DE, Report to the Federal Ministry of Economy and Labour, Austria and to the European Commission (Enterprise DG).
48. Rask, M., Maciukaite-Zviniene, S., & Petrauskiene, J. (2012). Innovations in public engagement and participatory performance of the nations. Science and Public Policy, 39(6), 710-721. doi: 10. 1093/scipol/scs089.
49. Saltmarsh, J., Giles, D. E., Ward, E., & Bulione, S. M. (2009). Rewarding community-engaged scholarship. New Directions for Higher Education, 147, 25-35.
50. Schoonmaker, M. G., & Carayannis, E. G. (2012). Mode 3: a proposed classification scheme for the knowledge economy and society. Journal of Knowledge Economy. doi: 10. 1007/s13132-012-0097-4.
51. Schuetze, H. G. (2010). The 'third mission' of universities: engagement and service. In P. Inman & H. G. Schuetze (Eds.), The community engagement and service mission of universities (pp. 13-31). Leicester: Niace.
52. Simon, L. A. K. (2009). Embracing the world grand ideal: affirming the Morrill Act for the twenty-first century global society. East Lansing: Michigan State University.
53. Strand, K., Marullo, S., Cutforth, N., Stoeker, R., & Domhue, P. (2003). Community-based research and higher education. Principles and practices. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
54. Varga, A. (Ed.). (2009). Universities, knowledge transfer and regional development. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
55. Vargiu, A. (2008). Le diversità nella ricerca-azione partecipata: alcune implicazioni metodologiche e procedurali. Studi di Sociologia, 2(XLVI), 205-232.
56. Wachelder, J. (2003). Democratizing science: various routes and visions of Dutch science shops. Science, Technology and Human Values, 28(2), 244-273.
57. Walshok, M. (1995). Knowledge without boundaries: what America's research universities can do for the economy, the workplace, and the community. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
58. Zaal, R., & Leydersdorff, L. (1987). Amsterdam science shop and its influence on university research: the effects of ten years of dealing with non-academic questions. Science and Public Policy, 14(6), 310-316.