Performance indicators as conceptual technologies

This paper posits that performance indicators (PIs)are conceptual technologies that shape what issuesacademics think about and how academics think aboutthose issues by embedding normative assumptions intothe selection and structure of those indicators.Exploring the assumptions embedded in Alberta's(Canada) PIs yields an initial typology of assumptionsthat academics can apply to performance indicators inhigher education to understand, refine or criticallychallenge their introduction.

[1]  Michael Power,et al.  The audit society : rituals of verification , 1997 .

[2]  R. Barnetson.  A Review of Alberta's Performance‐based Funding Mechanism , 1999 .

[3]  Licensing.  1997-98 annual report , 1998 .

[4]  H. R. Kells.  Self-Regulation in Higher Education: A Multi-National Perspective on Collaborative Systems of Quality Assurance and Control , 1992 .

[5]  P. Ewell.  Assessment, Accountability and Improvement: Managing the Contradiction. , 1987 .

[6]  Frank A. Schmidtlein,et al.  Assumptions underlying performance‐based budgeting , 1999 .

[7]  Michael X Cohen,et al.  A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice. , 1972 .

[8]  Stephen Hanney,et al.  The Use of Performance Indicators in Higher Education: The Challenge of the Quality Movement. Third Edition. Higher Education Policy Series 34. , 1996 .

[9]  I. Horowitz,et al.  The Higher Learning and High Technology: Dynamics of Higher Education Policy Formation. , 1991 .

[10]  L. Mcdonnell.  Assessment Policy as Persuasion and Regulation , 1994, American Journal of Education.

[11]  Janice Newson.  Subordinating Democracy: The effects of fiscal retrenchment and university-business partnerships on knowledge creation and knowledge dissemination in universities , 1994 .

[12]  A. Schneider,et al.  Behavioral Assumptions of Policy Tools , 1990, The Journal of Politics.

[13]  Michael Power,et al.  Making things auditable , 1996 .

[14]  Marc Cutright.  Planning in Higher Education: A Model from Chaos Theory. , 1999 .

[15]  Licensing.  1998-99 annual report , 1999 .

[16]  L. Mcdonnell,et al.  Alternative policy instruments , 1987 .

[17]  Mien Segers,et al.  Management Information and Performance: Indicators in Higher Education: An International Issue , 1989 .

[18]  Alice Boberg,et al.  Resource Allocation and Public Policy in Alberta's Postsecondary System. , 2000 .

[19]  Robert B. Wagner.  Accountability in Education: A Philosophical Inquiry , 1989 .

[20]  Guy Neave,et al.  Accountability and Control , 1980 .

[21]  Johan P. Olsen,et al.  Ambiguity and choice in organizations , 1976 .

[22]  Alice Boberg,et al.  System-Wide Program Assessment with Performance Indicators: Alberta’s Performance Funding Mechanism , 2001, Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation.

[23]  W. Tierney.  Culture and Ideology in Higher Education: Advancing a Critical Agenda , 1991 .

[24]  William N. Dunn,et al.  Public Policy Analysis , 1981 .

[25]  J. Pfeffer,et al.  The Power and the Glory@@@Managing with Power: Politics and Influence in Organizations. , 1992 .

[26]  Roger Kaufman,et al.  Preparing Useful Performance Indicators. , 1988 .

[27]  David Ingram.  Critical Theory and Philosophy , 1990 .

[28]  Robert N. Stern,et al.  The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. , 1979 .

[29]  Larry L. Leslie,et al.  Academic Capitalism: Politics, Policies, and the Entrepreneurial University , 1997 .

[30]  S. Ruppert.  Charting Higher Education Accountability: A Sourcebook on State-Level Performance Indicators. , 1994 .

[31]  Jan Currie,et al.  Universities and Globalization: Critical Perspectives , 2000 .

[32]  Michael A. Peters,et al.  Performance indicators in New Zealand higher education: accountability or control? , 1992 .