Titlebook: Learning Standards and the Assessment of Quality in Higher Education: Contested Policy Trajectories; Jon Yorke,Lesley Vidovich Book 2016 S

開脫

書目名稱Learning Standards and the Assessment of Quality in Higher Education: Contested Policy Trajectories影響因子(影響力)




書目名稱Learning Standards and the Assessment of Quality in Higher Education: Contested Policy Trajectories影響因子(影響力)學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Learning Standards and the Assessment of Quality in Higher Education: Contested Policy Trajectories網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開度




書目名稱Learning Standards and the Assessment of Quality in Higher Education: Contested Policy Trajectories網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開度學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Learning Standards and the Assessment of Quality in Higher Education: Contested Policy Trajectories被引頻次




書目名稱Learning Standards and the Assessment of Quality in Higher Education: Contested Policy Trajectories被引頻次學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Learning Standards and the Assessment of Quality in Higher Education: Contested Policy Trajectories年度引用




書目名稱Learning Standards and the Assessment of Quality in Higher Education: Contested Policy Trajectories年度引用學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Learning Standards and the Assessment of Quality in Higher Education: Contested Policy Trajectories讀者反饋




書目名稱Learning Standards and the Assessment of Quality in Higher Education: Contested Policy Trajectories讀者反饋學(xué)科排名

廚師

Introduction,then explained. The chapter concludes by foreshadowing the structure of the book. Beyond Chap. 5, the specific findings are presented in Chaps. 6, 7, 8 and 9, a meta-analysis is discussed in Chap. 10 and implications for future development of theory, policy/practice and research are raised in Chap. 11.

BRUNT

Key Concepts: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations,lity’, the specification of ‘learning standards’ has become prominent, and, in turn, the measurement of learning standards carries high-stakes implications for assessment policies within educational institutions. While many would agree that some form of accountability is necessary, the various forms remain complex and highly contested.

天空

Theoretical Frameworks for Policy Analysis,onsists of the contexts of influences, policy text production, practices/effects and longer term outcomes. While these four contexts represent continuous policy processes, they are separated here for analytic convenience. They are used to generate the four main research questions for the study.

提名

Research Methods,n of anonymity. Critical discourse analysis (CDA) is the primary mechanism of data analysis because it highlights the interrogation of texts within their wider social and political contexts; a specific example of interrogation of a policy text using CDA is included. A discussion of ethical considerations closes this chapter.

露天歷史劇

債務(wù)

Findings (4): Policy Outcomes,ss settings. A significant concern was that more precise definitions of standards would lead to ‘standardisation’ which would then undermine the development creativity and innovation in university students, when organisations such as UNESCO and the OECD highlight their importance in the global knowledge era of the twenty-first century.

博愛家

A Meta-analysis of Policy Processes,trajectories under investigation in this book. The chapter concludes with an examination of the utility of policy network theory, by critiquing both its strengths and weaknesses, and the development of potential new framings for policy analysis in globalising times.

POINT

CURT