(Source: First Reading EDU, Ministry of Education Assessment Center Public Account, November 23, 2023)

Educational evaluation is related to the direction of educational development and the construction of an educational power. What kind of evaluation baton is there, what kind of w88 casino-running orientation is there. Compared with my country's higher education evaluation work, countries such as the United Kingdom, the United States, and Russia have a longer history in higher education evaluation. The United Kingdom began to pay attention to the quality of education and teaching in universities in the second half of the 19th century, and began to systematically study the quality standards and evaluation of British universities in 1983.

Similar to my country's current evaluation model, the British higher education evaluation also determines the general evaluation framework and then combines the self-evaluation of universities with the external evaluation of the institution for specific implementation, which has certain reference significance for my country's higher education evaluation.

2023 is the third year of the trial implementation of my country’s new higher education evaluation indicator system, and the evaluation papers of 7 pilot universities have also been handed in. In the context of the new era, from what angles can higher education evaluation work be approached, and what indicators will be focused on? We take the higher education evaluation model of the University of Cambridge as an example and borrow from others to further analyze our country's higher education evaluation model.

1. Stage characteristics of higher education evaluation in the UK

Divided according to the maturity of higher education evaluation, the British higher education evaluation can be divided into four stages using time as a clue, namely: the embryonic period before 1991, the start-up period from 1991 to 2001, the development period from 2001 to 2011, and the stable period from 2011 to the present.

Stage characteristics of British education assessment

British higher education assessment sprouted in the second half of the 19th century. At that time, Britain's technological and economic development gradually began to lag behind that of the United States and Germany. As the core department of talent training, universities began to receive more attention for their teaching quality.

At this stage, the British government established the Board of Education (Board of Education) and began to study the model of higher education evaluation. In 1964, with the economic development and cultural progress, society's requirements for the quality of talents also increased accordingly. Against this background, the United Kingdom established the "National Academic Accreditation Committee (CNAA)" to be responsible for the evaluation and awarding of degree majors in colleges and universities across the country.

At the end of the 1970s, due to the economic downturn, higher education funding in the UK was severely reduced. Universities were pushed to the market and had to further strengthen cooperation with the business sector to seek development. The subjects of higher education evaluation began to gradually diversify. In 1983, the "College Vice-Chancellors' Council (CVCP)" and the "University Grants Committee (UCG)" jointly established the "Academic Standards Group" and began to focus on research on evaluation models and standards for university teaching and management quality, kicking off the discussion and evaluation of British university quality.

The systematic implementation of higher education evaluation in the UK began with the establishment of the Higher Education Funding Council (HEFCS) in 1992. While HEFCS takes over the overall management of quality and funding matters for all colleges and universities, it also sets up a "Quality Assessment Committee (QAC)" to be specifically responsible for the evaluation of the teaching quality of colleges and universities.

In 1993-1995 and 1995-2001, the United Kingdom conducted two rounds of higher education evaluations. The evaluation mainly focused on reviewing whether the academic standards and quality management procedures of institutions were standardized, and through evaluation, ensuring the quality of the courses and degrees awarded to both students and employers. In 1997, the UK established an independent "Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA)" and no longer conducted evaluation through foundations. At this stage, the index system for higher education evaluation was gradually standardized and the model gradually matured.

As higher education became more popular in the UK, in 2001, the UK began to adopt a new higher education evaluation model - Institutional Audit. As the name suggests, this model pays more attention to the evaluation and control of teaching quality by the institution itself, and then the British Higher Education Quality Assurance Agency evaluates the quality assurance work of the institution. At this stage, since students' tuition fees are no longer entirely financed, tuition fees have become one of the main sources of funding for colleges and universities. Therefore, providing students with open and transparent information has begun to become the focus of higher education evaluation. The new evaluation model shows the characteristics of attaching importance to quality improvement and emphasizing student participation. Through evaluation reform, the quality of higher education and the number of students are further guaranteed.

In March 2011, QAA officially announced the use of institutional evaluation (Insituational Evaluation) to replace institutional audits in England and Northern Ireland. The emphasis on student-centeredness increases the number of ways students can participate in the evaluation of the w88 casino, and quality assurance is flexible enough to adapt to public needs and the development of higher education. Reflected in the assessment report, its content and language are clearer and easier to understand, making it easier for students and the public to pay attention to and understand it. In 2017, the British government released and began to use the "Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF)" as the standard framework for undergraduate teaching level evaluation, which is evaluated by an evaluation team composed of students, academic practitioners, employer representatives, and experts in other fields. In 2022, the UK will continue to release "TEF2023", further improving the evaluation framework from the perspective of "educational value-added".

2. Cambridge University’s current higher education evaluation model

In the early higher education evaluation in the UK, the evaluation model dominated by the government dominated the mainstream. After the funding sources of colleges and universities were no longer fully borne by the government, the evaluation subject gradually changed from the government-led model to the w88 casino self-evaluation, and emphasized the role of students and investors. The government has transformed into the role of supervisor, providing a scientific and standardized framework for the self-evaluation of colleges and universities externally, and ensuring the rationality of self-evaluation of colleges and universities.

In addition to funding sources, British universities also have a long tradition of autonomy. This tradition makes the w88 casino itself responsible for the quality and standards of the majors and degrees it offers. British universities not only have internal quality assurance mechanisms to regularly conduct teaching supervision and review majors, but also hire external prosecutors and academic auditors to periodically review and evaluate the w88 casino's educational standards and operating processes.

Based on the characteristics of higher education evaluation in the UK, this article focuses on the University of Cambridge, a well-established British university, and analyzes its internal quality assurance system and external dynamic improvement mechanism. Taking this as an example, it presents the overall higher education evaluation model in the UK.

The University of Cambridge is one of the oldest universities in the UK. It has 31 independent autonomous colleges and 6 academic colleges. It is also traditionally an autonomous w88 casino and attaches great importance to improving the quality of education and ensuring educational standards. Under voluntary conditions, Cambridge has established an internal quality assurance system, which is combined with external quality supervision to jointly ensure and improve the quality of its education.

(1) Internal quality assurance system

(1)Organizational structure

Cambridge’s Education Quality and Policy Office is responsible for all quality assurance provided by higher education and oversees the formulation and implementation of education-related policies across the w88 casino. Specific work is carried out through the General Board Education Committee and its subcommittees, and at the same time in cooperation with schools, departments and colleges.

Specifically, under the leadership of the Education Quality and Policy Office, Cambridge’s education quality assessment consists of multiple levels of approval and consultation. The management entities are relatively diverse and mainly consist of the following parts (see the figure below):

The composition of the Cambridge University Educational Assessment Agency

1. General Board. The overall responsibility for supervising the w88 casino’s educational policies and w88 casino operations lies with the General Board, and is responsible to the Council and Regent House. There are seven committees under the General Council. Among them, the Education Committee (GB Education Committee) bears the most responsibility in teaching evaluation. It directly interfaces with departments in the innovation of teaching strategies, the establishment of new courses, course content evaluation, and teaching evaluation processes. Based on this, it provides relevant suggestions to the General Council on basic matters of education strategy.

2. The w88 casino Council (Council) is the coordinating organization of the departments to which it belongs. It is responsible for strengthening the connections between the departments to which it belongs, allocating funds, and making recommendations to the Council on the resource needs and priorities of the departments. By appointing members of the internal review team, the Board of Directors provides opinions on review reports and is responsible for the overall quality. At the same time, the Board of Directors' opinions will also be sought when major adjustments are made to the curriculum and new courses are launched.

3. The Regent House, as the democratic decision-making management body of Cambridge, is responsible for approving major changes in teaching matters at the same time as the General Council; it also expresses opinions and suggestions on proposals and holds the right to vote for approval.

4. Faculty Boards and Degree Committees. The Faculty Board, through the Education Committee, is responsible to the General Council in accordance with the law. The purpose of its establishment is to ensure that teaching is carried out reasonably and the teaching level reaches high standards. In addition to any sub-committees established to govern teaching, the relevant Directors of Studies Committees and the w88 casino Council should be formally consulted regarding the impact of teaching or resource allocation in the College. Many colleges will also have specialized degree committees responsible for overseeing the quality of graduate and postgraduate programs.

5. Teaching Committees. Each college has a committee that is mainly responsible for supervising teaching and learning issues. It can be in the form of a faculty committee or a degree committee. In special circumstances, duties may also be entrusted to a specialized teaching committee.

6. Staff-student Joint Committees. The number of representatives on the teaching committee may be limited. In addition to the teaching committee, each college or department is expected to establish a committee composed of junior and senior members to raise issues related to course teaching, student opinions, etc. on the committee.

(2)Quality Assurance Process

Departments are the departments at the University of Cambridge specifically responsible for the development of teaching work. They are also the departments that determine curriculum, teaching methods and teaching evaluation forms. Starting from 2023, the University of Cambridge has formed an institutional evaluation model consisting of four links: Education Monitoring and Review, course descriptions, student surveys, and external examiner reports. It is implemented specifically by departments and departments, and the w88 casino ensures the effective implementation of the work.

1. Education Monitoring and Review (EMR)

In 2023, the University of Cambridge officially began to use "Education Monitoring and Review (EMR)" to replace the Teaching Evaluation (Learning and Teaching Review) and Annual Program Review (Annual Program Review) that were previously organized every six years. This assessment framework applies to any course department, college and institution offering scholarships, including all Honors degree examinations, Masters and PhD programmes, and courses listed as "non-member awards" in the Statutes and Regulations.

The implementation of this framework includes the following five stages (see the figure below), which enables the w88 casino to better share and learn from good practices among homologous disciplines and make up for the shortcomings in weak areas. Through regular review of courses and monitoring within a shorter period of time, the purpose of improving teaching quality and enhancing academic standards is achieved.

EMR execution steps diagram

EMR is administered by the Office of Educational Quality and Policy and operates on a more flexible schedule. Timetables for submitting and reviewing assessment materials can be in both standard and offset models. The difference between the two models is that under the standard model, applications are submitted every two years and all courses (undergraduate, postgraduate taught courses and postgraduate research courses) are jointly reviewed. Under the offset model, applications may be submitted on an alternating basis, i.e. all undergraduate courses are reviewed in the first year and all graduate courses are reviewed in the second year.

In general, every course at Cambridge is reviewed at least every two years. Regardless of whether it is the standard mode or the offset mode, all newly opened courses must be reviewed immediately after the first report is completed to ensure the rationality of the course settings.

2.Programme Specifications

In order to ensure the rationality of course creation and conduct, the University of Cambridge has set up course descriptions to outline the expected learning outcomes and standards for the entire course. Course descriptions serve as a reference record for course completion, assessment, monitoring and review and are shared with students, internal and external examiners, professional statutory bodies and academic reviewers.

Departments set up course descriptions, on the one hand, to ensure that students can understand the purpose of the course, learning outcomes, course results, teaching methods, assessment methods, admission requirements, etc.; on the other hand, through the openness and transparency of information, the department promotes research and reflection on the purpose, content and teaching methods of the course, and further ensures the quality of the course.

3. University-wide surveys

While self-evaluating, the University of Cambridge has also participated in a number of national basic surveys to better provide basis for teaching reforms. Any issues discovered during the investigation will be submitted to the relevant colleges, departments, and departments, and then reviewed by the General Council to ensure the effectiveness of the reform content.

The National Student Survey is one of the important survey projects that the University of Cambridge regularly participates in. It has been conducted annually since 2005 and is managed by the external agency Ipsos MORI. The survey targets mainly third-year students nationwide. The survey asked students to evaluate their satisfaction with course quality and rate courses from 27 aspects including learning opportunities, learning resources, and learning communities.

In addition to national surveys, the University of Cambridge also regularly conducts department-based surveys on the quality evaluation of the courses selected by students to understand their learning process.

The department will combine the results of the national student curriculum evaluation survey and the on-campus survey to reflect on its curriculum setting and reform, form a report, and jointly evaluate it with the department and w88 casino departments as the basis for subsequent adjustment of teaching plans and evaluation of teaching quality.

4.Examiners' Reports

After the investigation and evaluation work is completed, Cambridge will regularly reflect on its evaluation methods and the performance of the persons under investigation, respond to external assessments, write reports, and provide feedback on targeted external opinions.

(2) External dynamic improvement mechanism

In addition to the system of self-evaluation of colleges and universities, external setting of standards and supervision of college evaluations are another important component of British higher education evaluation. Currently, the three most important organizations for external supervision are the Office for Students, Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies, and the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. All three are private institutions. Among them, the Office of Student Affairs (OFS) is an independent public institution and is not affiliated with the government. However, its supervision results of higher education institutions need to be reported regularly to Parliament through the British Ministry of Education. Statutory accreditation agencies (PSRBs) are social institutions with the participation of multiple subjects. They mainly evaluate the teaching quality of various majors in colleges and universities. The Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) is an independent charity that cooperates with governments, universities, and educational research institutions, and is committed to providing standards for quality assessment of higher education.

(1) Office of Student Affairs (OFS)

In 2017, the British government stipulated in the Higher Education and Research Act 2017 that the Office of Student Affairs (OFS), as the only higher education regulatory agency representing the government, conducts full-process and comprehensive supervision of the operation of higher education institutions. At the same time, a systematic higher education institution supervision system has been established for early prevention, formal intervention, and strict punishment.

In terms of supervision, British higher education institutions that comply with the provisions of the Higher Education and Research Act (2017) must apply for registration with OFS. Registration with OFS is the only way for British higher education institutions to enter the market. OFS will first conduct a series of risk assessments for higher education institutions. After registration, it will also continue to conduct risk assessments on registration conditions to determine the degree of risk that registered higher education institutions violate one or more continuous registration conditions. The results of the risk assessment will provide a basis for OFS to conduct more intensive monitoring of higher education institutions or add more specific continuous registration conditions. The University of Cambridge also officially registered with OFS in July 2018.

In 2017, OFS released the "Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF)", which is implemented around 3 core indicators (teaching quality, learning environment and learning outcomes) and 6 corresponding specific indicators. The 6 indicators include course teaching, assessment and feedback, academic support, dropout rate, employment rate and continuing education rate, high-skilled employment rate and continuing education rate, and are updated annually.

(2) Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies (Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies)

The University of Cambridge has also established cooperative relationships with professional and statutory regulatory agencies, such as the General Medical Council (GMC), the Institution of Mechanical Engineers (IMechE), etc. PSPRBs regularly provide useful feedback on teaching, curriculum and assessment to the University of Cambridge. Each department responds to the feedback in a prescribed manner and forwards the report to the Office of Education Quality and Policy, which submits it to the Academic Standards and Improvement Committee for review to obtain professional accreditation of the course and enter the professional field.

(3) Quality Assurance Agency (QAA)

Although the QAA is no longer responsible for reviewing higher education in England, it will still assess the quality of higher education institutions. Regularly provides a series of important standards and regulations for reference in the development, management and review of British universities, including Cambridge. These standards and system documents include: British higher education quality guidelines, basic descriptions of disciplines, descriptions of degree characteristics, etc.

At the same time, QAA will also conduct a preliminary evaluation of the new degree-granting rights of higher education institutions. The content of the evaluation is the credibility of the higher education institution's self-evaluation. If QAA determines that the higher education institution's self-evaluation is more credible, the results will be fed back to OFS, and OFS will grant it the degree-granting right within a three-year observation period.

3. my country’s higher education evaluation model

Since my country launched higher education assessment in 1985, after years of practice and exploration, my country’s first regulations on higher education assessment were promulgated in October 1990, namely the “Interim Provisions on Education Assessment in General Colleges and Universities”, forming a higher education quality assessment index system that combines three basic forms of qualification assessment, w88 casino-running assessment and selection assessment. It also stipulates that the assessment "will be organized and implemented by the people's governments at all levels and their education administrative departments." In 2011, the Ministry of Education issued the "Opinions on the Evaluation of Undergraduate Teaching in General Universities", forming a "five-in-one" quality assurance system based on w88 casino self-evaluation, with institutional evaluation, professional certification and evaluation, international evaluation and normal monitoring of teaching basic status data as the main content, and it has been in use to this day.

my country’s evaluation index system is based on the principles of combining scientificity with feasibility, democracy with centralization, sustainability with forward-lookingness, external evaluation with internal evaluation, and is characterized by strong operability and the combination of qualitative and quantitative analysis. At the same time, based on objective evaluation standards and the actual situation of colleges and universities, the focus of evaluation is on "promoting reform through evaluation, promoting construction through evaluation, and promoting management through evaluation", which enhances the interactivity and initiative of colleges and universities in the evaluation process and makes the existing higher education evaluation model adapt to the situation of higher education in my country.

However, due to the late start of my country's higher education quality assessment, there are also a series of problems such as narrow development space for social intermediaries, single evaluation indicator system, unfair and insufficient allocation of evaluation funds, weak scientific evaluation methods, and difficulty in transforming the use of evaluation results, which have affected the development and effectiveness of higher education evaluation. my country's newly introduced "Implementation Plan for the Review and Evaluation of Undergraduate Education and Teaching in General Universities (2021-2025)" conducts higher education evaluation on a five-year cycle, using the more complete "Indicator System for Review and Evaluation of Undergraduate Education and Teaching in General Universities" as the standard, and conducts pilot evaluations at 7 universities at different levels, including Tsinghua University, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China Agricultural University, Anhui University, Liaoning University of Petrochemical Technology, Changshu Institute of Technology, and Quzhou University, to explore a new model of higher education evaluation suitable for our country.

IV. Comparative analysis of two sets of higher education evaluation models

The higher education evaluation models in China and the UK are both products of higher education adapting to the times and the development of the market economy and political system. The overall goal is to encourage the outstanding in higher education institutions to continuously optimize, and the unqualified to rectify and strive to meet standards. Due to the different national conditions of the two countries, there are also some differences in subtle details in the educational goals, nature, task-setting evaluation indicator system, inspection program and evaluation standards.

(1) Differences in assessment subjects

The management of higher education in the UK is carried out jointly by the British government and other interest groups. State intervention and market regulation forces coexist, thus forming a dual evaluation system involving the participation of the government and university stakeholders. At the same time, by taking advantage of the intermediary nature of the evaluation agency, an effective operating mechanism that organically combines internal and external evaluations has been established.

Relatively speaking, the higher education evaluation system that our country has formed over a long period of time is relatively simple, and evaluation institutions are generally official in nature. The government takes the lead in assessment, formulates and approves the establishment standards of higher education institutions, supervises the running level of higher education institutions, inspects and evaluates the review and approval authority, and achieves the purpose of controlling and regulating the quality of teaching in colleges and universities through unified organization and regulation.

(2) Differences in assessment content and tasks

Whether it is government evaluation or the evaluation of universities themselves, British higher education evaluation mainly focuses on academic evaluation, revolves around academic review, and emphasizes academic standards. The evaluation is mainly to guide the development of the w88 casino's connotation, focusing on the evaluation of different colleges within the w88 casino, focusing on one or several disciplines to be at the forefront of the country, and guiding the w88 casino to improve the level of majors and disciplines that already have certain advantages.

my country’s evaluation has long been based on schools, focusing more on improving the overall strength of the w88 casino. However, after the introduction of new evaluation standards, my country's higher education evaluation has gradually increased its focus on single subjects, striving to establish distinctive subject systems in colleges and universities at different levels.

(3) Differences in evaluation characteristics

The intermediary organization in the British higher education evaluation system is a moderator between the government and universities, and takes an indirect form to control the implementation of national higher education. British higher education evaluation ensures the participation of multiple subjects through the system, and puts more emphasis on the status and responsibilities of college students in the higher education quality evaluation system.

After years of practice and exploration, my country’s higher education system has also begun to attach importance to mobilizing the enthusiasm and competitiveness of schools to proactively carry out evaluations. The new indicator system is more detailed and puts forward more detailed requirements for software and hardware. Evaluation standards are gradually differentiated, distinguishing colleges and universities that cultivate academic talents from applied talents, and conduct evaluations separately, with disciplines as the leading factor and students as the core.

It is worth noting that my country has also established an evaluation process of "assessment application - w88 casino self-evaluation - expert review - conclusion feedback". This process is the same as the UK in terms of quality control. It includes internal self-evaluation and evaluates itself within the framework of rules; it also invites external experts to conduct evaluations to further ensure the rationality of the evaluation. Make full use of my country's high efficiency in government organizations and the resources of government agencies to ensure the reliability and validity of evaluations.

References

1. Liu Xiaohong. Enlightenment of foreign higher education evaluation systems on my country’s higher education evaluation [J]. Journal of Beijing Institute of Technology (Social Science Edition), 2004, (1): 14-16.

2. Wang Zhanjun, Liao Xiangyang, Zhou Xuejun. Problems and Countermeasures in China’s Higher Education Assessment Practice [J]. Tsinghua University Educational Research. 2004, (06): 60-65.

3.https://www.educationalpolicy.admin.cam.ac.uk/

4.https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/zhengceku/2021-02/07/content_5585584.htm

5.https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/2021-02/07/content_5585686.htm