Czasopismo
Tytuł artykułu
Autorzy
Warianty tytułu
Języki publikacji
Abstrakty
Objective: The main goal of the article is to discuss and elaborate on the basics foundations of the concept of accountability in terms of the public universities management.
Research Design & Methods: The article is of descriptive character, thus it is based on literature review and its constructive critics.
Findings: The article presents briefly the concept of entrepreneurial university to relate this idea to develop the accountability practices in higher education. Subsequently, the limitations of trends related to the development of the entrepreneurial university and accountability were discussed.
Implications & Recommendations: Higher education is increasingly becoming a business operation, in which competition plays a key role. Accountability at universities is established to implement a specific accounting and reporting system, which is a prerequisite for the existence of this accountability and responsibility. Accounting of higher education systems is a consequence of the marketization of university.
Contribution & Value Added: The article gets the scientific thoughts in order in four main fields, namely (i) entrepreneurial university, (ii) university accountability, (iii) accounting and autonomy of universities, (iv) measures of university performance. (original abstract)
Research Design & Methods: The article is of descriptive character, thus it is based on literature review and its constructive critics.
Findings: The article presents briefly the concept of entrepreneurial university to relate this idea to develop the accountability practices in higher education. Subsequently, the limitations of trends related to the development of the entrepreneurial university and accountability were discussed.
Implications & Recommendations: Higher education is increasingly becoming a business operation, in which competition plays a key role. Accountability at universities is established to implement a specific accounting and reporting system, which is a prerequisite for the existence of this accountability and responsibility. Accounting of higher education systems is a consequence of the marketization of university.
Contribution & Value Added: The article gets the scientific thoughts in order in four main fields, namely (i) entrepreneurial university, (ii) university accountability, (iii) accounting and autonomy of universities, (iv) measures of university performance. (original abstract)
Rocznik
Tom
Strony
9--21
Opis fizyczny
Twórcy
autor
- University of Social Sciences in Łódź, Poland
Bibliografia
- Allan, A., & Allan, M. M. (2000). The South African truth and reconciliation commission as a therapeutic tool. Behavioral sciences & the law, 18(4), 459-477.
- Ashton, R. H. (1990). Pressure and performance in accounting decision settings: Paradoxical effects of incentives, feedback, and justification. Journal of Accounting Research Vol. 28, 148-180.
- Ball R., Wilkinson R., The use and abuse of performance indicators in UK higher education, "Higher Education", 1994, no 27.
- Barnett, R. (2000). University knowledge in an age of supercomplexity. Higher education, 40(4), 409-422.
- Baron, J. N., Burton, M. D., & Hannan, M. T. (1999). Engineering bureaucracy: The genesis of formal policies, positions, and structures in high-technology firms. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 15(1), 1-41.
- Bogue, E.G., & Hall, K.B. (2003a). Beyond Systems. Mortal Outrage and Other Servants of Quality [in:] Quality and Accountability in Higher Education. Praeger, Westport, Connecticut, London.
- Bogue, E.G., & Hall, K.B. (2003b). Improvement versus Stewardship. Reconciling Civic and Collegiate Accountability Cultures [in:] Quality and Accountability in Higher Education. Praeger, Westport, Connecticut, London.
- Bovens, M. (2007). Analysing and assessing accountability: a conceptual framework1. European law journal, 13(4), 447-468.
- Brint, S. (2005). Creating the future:'New directions' in American research universities. Minerva, 43(1), 23-50.
- Burbules N., Torres C., Globalisation and Education: Critical Perspectives, Routledge: New York 2000.
- Cave M., Kogan M., Hanney S., The Scope and Effects of Performance Measurement in British Higher Education [in:] F.J.R.C. Dochy, M.S.R.Segers, W.H.F.W. Wijnen(eds.),"Management Information and Performance Indicators in Higher Education: An International Issue", Assen/Maastricht: Van Gorcum and Comp, B.V., 1990.
- Clark, B. R. (1998). The entrepreneurial university: Demand and response 1. Tertiary Education & Management, 4(1), 5-16.
- Connolly, C., & Hyndman, N. (2004). Performance reporting: a comparative study of British and Irish charities. The British Accounting Review, 36(2), 127-154.
- Cooper, S. M., & Owen, D. L. (2007). Corporate social reporting and stakeholder accountability: The missing link. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 32(7), 649-667.
- Cruickshank M. (2003), Total quality management in the higher education sector: a literature review from an international and Australian perspective, "TQM & Business Excellence", Vol. 14 No. 10, pp. 1159-67.
- Cuenin S., The Case of Performance Indicators in Universities: An InternationalSurvey, "International Journal of Institutional Management", 1987, vol. 11, no 2.
- Darling-Hammond L., Snyder J.,Accountability for Resources and Outcomes: An Introduction,"Education Policy Analysis Archives", 2015, 23(20). http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v23.2024, EPAA/AAPE's Special Series on A New Paradigm for Educational Accountability: Accountability for Resources and Outcomes.
- De Boer, H., Enders, J., & Schimank, U. (2007). On the way towards new public management? The governance of university systems in England, the Netherlands, Austria, and Germany (pp. 137-152). Springer Netherlands.
- Dekker, S. (2011). The criminalization of human error in aviation and healthcare: A review. Safety science, 49(2), 121-127.
- Dochy F., Segers M., Selecting Indicators on the Basis of Essential Criteria and Appropriate Assessment Methods or a Quality Assurance System, Paper prepared for theCHEPS Conference, "Quality Assessment in Higher Education" at Utrecht, March 16th,1990.
- Dubnick, M. (2005). Accountability and the promise of performance: In search of the mechanisms. Public Performance & Management Review, 28(3), 376-417.
- Dubnick, M., Accountability as Cultural Keyword, University of New Hampshire, Prepared for a presentation at a seminar of theResearch Colloquium on Good Governance, Netherlands Institute of Government, VU University, Amsterdam, May 9 2012.
- Eisenstadt, S. N. (1959). Bureaucracy, bureaucratization, and debureaucratization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 302-320.
- Elton, L.B., Warning Signs, "Times Higher Education Supplement", 1987, 11.9.87.
- Fielden, J., Abercromby, K., UNESCO Higher Education Indicators Study: Accountability and International Cooperationin the Renewal of Higher Education, Paris: UNESCO 2000
- Freeman, I., Thomas, M. (2005), Consumerism in Education - A comparison between Canada and the United Kingdom, "International Journal of Educational Management", 19(2), 153-177.
- Gandhi, M.M., IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education (IOSR-JRME),"Autonomy and Accountability in Higher Education An Indian Perspective", 2013, vol. 3, issue 5.
- Georgia Professional Standards Commission, Lexicon, Atlanta: GAPSC, 2003, www.gapsc.com/help.asp.
- Government of Australia, Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs, Characteristics andPerformance Indicators of Higher Education Institutions, Canberra: DETYA, 2003, www.detya.gov.au/archive/highered/statistics/characteristics/contents.htm
Typ dokumentu
Bibliografia
Identyfikatory
Identyfikator YADDA
bwmeta1.element.ekon-element-000171411905
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.