{"id":6217,"date":"2015-01-29T08:17:10","date_gmt":"2015-01-29T08:17:10","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/?p=6217"},"modified":"2015-01-29T08:17:10","modified_gmt":"2015-01-29T08:17:10","slug":"overturning-the-measuring-of-quality-a-gibbsean-revolution","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/2015\/01\/29\/overturning-the-measuring-of-quality-a-gibbsean-revolution\/","title":{"rendered":"Overturning the measuring of 'quality' \u2013 a Gibbsean revolution"},"content":{"rendered":"

Although Graham Gibb's\u00a0article<\/a> in the THE last\u00a0week is ostensibly about fees, ...<\/p>\n

\"Higher fees should reflect an institution's quality, rather than status, so we should start measuring it, argues Graham Gibbs\"<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

... it is actually\u00a0an argument about how to measure the\u00a0likely quality of student experience\u00a0in a university degree. \u00a0Gibbs says that much of what is currently measured in the various UK league tables are merely proxies for reputation:<\/p>\n

\"Input variables, such as resources, do not predict outcomes, such as degree results and employability, as much as you would expect. \u00a0And the modest extent to which input variables do predict outcomes results largely from reputation. \u00a0Input variables are even worse at predicting educational gains \u2013 the difference between students at the start and on graduation \u2013 than they are at predicting outcomes. \u00a0Outcome measures such as employability tell us little about the institution, other than about their reputation and the quality of students they can attract, and so outcome measures are also not as helpful as one might hope as indicators of quality.\"<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

He\u00a0argues that what can more validly predict educational gains are process measures: what institutions do with whatever students they have, using whatever resources are available. \u00a0He goes on to say that thirty years of research has identified which process variables best predict educational gains. \u00a0They include:<\/p>\n

class size; cohort size; who does the teaching; the volume, promptness and usefulness of feedback on student work; the extent of close contact with academics; and the extent of collaborative learning \u2013 along with the extent of student engagement that results from these variables.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Gibbs\u00a0says that key aspects of engagement include how much time students spend on\u00a0their studies, and the extent to which they take a deep approach (attempting to understand) or a surface approach (attempting only to reproduce). \u00a0 He\u00a0says that all these variables are measurable, and that institutions that have improved in these process variables have been shown to increase student engagement and increase learning gains, without increasing resources. \u00a0Gibbs says that the Quality Assurance Agency does not ask institutions to provide information about these educational characteristics,\u00a0nor do\u00a0National Student Survey and the National Union of Students' student satisfaction ratings.<\/p>\n

Whilst there is much to ponder here, and even agree with, my feeling is that a Gibbsean revolution in the way which \"quality\" is measured might not make all that much\u00a0difference to who comes out well \/ badly in all these measures. \u00a0It seems highly unlikely that the first shall be last, and last first.<\/p>\n

Whilst it might\u00a0be quite interesting\u00a0to find out, I'm sure institutions will say they cannot afford it. \u00a0They could, of course,\u00a0replace all those quality assurers and managers they now employ with real teachers who know something about both subject and teaching.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Although Graham Gibb's\u00a0article in the THE last\u00a0week is ostensibly about fees, ... \"Higher fees should reflect an institution's quality, rather than status, so we should start measuring it, argues Graham Gibbs\" ... it is actually\u00a0an argument about how to measure...<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":237,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[2,3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6217","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-comment","category-new-publications"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6217","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/237"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6217"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6217\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6217"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6217"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6217"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}