Evaluation and Research in Education
Editor: Professor Keith Morrison, Inter-University Institute of Macau
Associate Editor: Professor Stephen Gorard, University of York
Statistical Adviser: Professor Colin Baker, University of Wales Bangor
Reviews Editor: Dr. Emma Smith, University of York
|
Volume: 18 Number: 1&2 Page: 120–128
|
|
|
|
|
Goodhart's Law and Performance Indicators in Higher Education
|
Lewis Elton
University College London, Guildford, UK
|
|
After describing the historical development of performance indicators in higher education and the illustrations that they provide for Goodhart's law, the paper discusses the difference between outcome and process indicators. It is suggested that, as long as the latter refer to underlying processes, and not to those immediately accessible, they can be used with less risk of abuse. This suggestion is exemplified in terms of standards of academic professionalism, and a set of appropriate processes is suggested for formal audit. The ‘underlying processes’ are anchored in the concepts of ‘organised anarchy’ or ‘complex adaptive systems’. It is hypothesised that they can be influenced by common professional principles of those engaged in them, so as to favour a creatively organised anarchy which develops excellence through true professionalism ‘bottom up’, in contrast to less successful managerial attempts to create excellence ‘top down’. Finally, attention is drawn to the fact that traditional examinations also constitute an abuse of performance indicators.
Keywords: Goodhart's law, performance indicators, accountability, trust, higher education
© 2004 L. Elton
Full text PDF
|
