2016
DOI: 10.1080/03050068.2017.1254945
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Negative capability? Measuring the unmeasurable in education

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 42 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
0
14
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Another relevant factor relevant is the ease of measuring academic outcomes as indicators of pedagogic impact, rather than evaluating dispositions of active citizenship or personal agency. However, what is easy to measure does not always reflect what it is most important to measure [74]. This reiterates Biesta's assertion that that being clear about the rationale for measurement is essential, since educational evaluation is an engagement with values: it speaks to the question of "whether we are indeed measuring what we value, or whether we are just measuring what we (can) measure" [15] (p. 13).…”
Section: Prioritisation Of Qualification Outcomesmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Another relevant factor relevant is the ease of measuring academic outcomes as indicators of pedagogic impact, rather than evaluating dispositions of active citizenship or personal agency. However, what is easy to measure does not always reflect what it is most important to measure [74]. This reiterates Biesta's assertion that that being clear about the rationale for measurement is essential, since educational evaluation is an engagement with values: it speaks to the question of "whether we are indeed measuring what we value, or whether we are just measuring what we (can) measure" [15] (p. 13).…”
Section: Prioritisation Of Qualification Outcomesmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…A recognition that existing global level indicators did not fully express ideas about quality and equality was widely shared among representatives of the statistical community making representations to the OWG (2014b), working within UNESCO (Antoninis et al, 2016) and among academic commentators (Unterhalter, 2018b). UNESCO (2010) had pioneered some measures of inequality in education and global civil society organisations, like the Right to Education (RTE), had been working on some alternative indicators to capture facets of the interpretation of rights (De Beco, 2009).…”
Section: Indicatorsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is a metonymic assumption that the input or the outcome indicates the processes highlighted in the targets at work. But as many studies show, this is a shaky assumption, at best, and often wrong (Unterhalter, 2018b;Smith, 2016). Input indicators appear to have been selected by the IAEG because there are data on them, not because they are good proxies for the processes of inclusion or quality.…”
Section: The Limits Of Input or Outcome Indicatorsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Собственно, сама возможность характеризовать новый менеджеризм в общественном секторе именно как идеологию возникает благодаря тому, что его широкое практическое применение основано на вере в способность с помощью набора показателей оценить эффективность по природе сложной, многоаспектной и часто творческой образовательной и научной деятельности [Unterhalter, 2017]. Более того, можно утверждать, что к настоящему времени во многом сформирована определенная разновидность управленческой культуры, принимающей как должное способность оценивать на основании сформированных систем показателей и ранжирования эффективность образовательной и научной деятельности .…”
Section: восприятие реформ высшего образования и науки через призму дunclassified