An Analysis of Methodologies, Incentives, and Effects of Performance Evaluation in Higher Education: The English Experience

The chapter illustrates the English systems for research evaluation (the Research Excellence Framework—REF) and teaching evaluation (Teaching Excellence and Student Outcomes Framework—TEF) as NPM-driven mechanisms aimed at increasing public accountability and efficiency. Particular attention is given to the methodology of assessment, the incentives provided through the evaluation mechanism and the actual/potential effects that have been generating on both academics and universities. These two experiences are analyzed through the lens of the Management Control Theory (MCT), which argues that each evaluation system must be designed according to the nature of the activity/task under evaluation in order to be effective. Two dimensions are particularly relevant to this regard: the degree of the measurability and attributability of the output (i) and the knowledge of the cause–effect relation or transformation process producing the output (ii). Different configurations of these two dimensions lead indeed to different types of evaluation (input, process, output evaluation). Regarding the REF, it is highlighted how peer-review reflects both a process-based and an output-based evaluation since the quality of the research outputs under assessment should be judged according to the consistency of theoretical arguments and research methodologies employed to develop that specific research output. However, when this process shifts towards increasing attention to just quantifiable indicators of research outputs, some unintended consequences may arise. Concerning the TEF, the dominant focus of the metrics-based system towards measurable dimensions of teaching outputs, may not be able to grasp more qualitative and not directly measurable aspects that are still crucial in discriminating between satisfactory or partial performances.