Search

In this paper the author examines the implementation of key performance indicators in Canadian post-secondary education institutions. More specifically he charts their implementation from the perspective of students and the effect they have on the quality and delivery of education. Key performance indicators (KPI) in Canada are administered by the ten provincial governments. In each of the jurisdictions in which they have been introduced KPIs have tied various forms of institutional performance to core funding and capital funding allocation. The paper offers a comparative analysis of how certain criteria are promoted by the establishment of KPIs. It examines the introduction of KPIs in three provinces: Ontario, Alberta, and British Columbia. In each case the complex set of politics and institutional relations at stake in the establishment of KPIs are examined. A comparative examination of each case provides signposts for best practices as well as instructive lessons in where and how quickly the very definition of accountability becomes a highly politicised term of contention. Finally, the paper makes proactive policy suggestions, from the standpoint of students, about the criteria that should be used in the establishment of KPIs. At all points the paper (re) inserts the perspective of students into the ongoing dialogue about accountability and the changing identity of higher education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Higher Education Management & Policy is the property of Organisation for Economic Cooperation & Development and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Analyzes the implication of the introduction of incentives that will enhance the funding of university research in Canada for the universities' accountability in accessing the fund. Expectations articulated by the Canadian Council of Ministers of Education for all postsecondary education across Canada that receives government support in 1999; Challenges identified by the strategy papers released by the federal government in February 2002; Incentives introduced by the federal government as a precursor to its strategy papers.

This paper reports on a study of four major Canadian universities' strategies for generating revenue in the face of prolonged cutbacks. The universities are placed on a continuum of higher education funding, institutional types and organisational attributes. The study produced new hypotheses about how universities' organisational attributes change as a result of the need to generate revenue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]