| dc.contributor.author | Jowett, Adrian K. | de | 
| dc.date.accessioned | 2011-03-01T06:37:00Z | de | 
| dc.date.accessioned | 2012-08-30T04:47:48Z |  | 
| dc.date.available | 2012-08-30T04:47:48Z |  | 
| dc.date.issued | 2005 | de | 
| dc.identifier.uri | http://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/23089 |  | 
| dc.description.abstract | This study sought to discover if staff in a university department believed the 1998                Subject Review to be a valid Quality Assurance process and if its findings could                benefit the department. Fifteen academic staff members took part in semi-structured                interviews and the content of their responses was analysed qualitatively.                Respondents described how Subject Review arose from an emerging ethos of                accountability in public services and the demand for performance indicators from                stakeholders. By considering their own viewpoints, as non-academics, they identified                with these pressures and accepted the need for Subject Review. The methodology of                Subject Review was well understood by staff and they explained how it was                unnecessarily bureaucratic for its aims. Respondents suspected that the outcome of                Subject Review would have an effect on the Department’s place in the                education marketplace and described why its impact would be minor. In explaining                their views of Subject Review staff largely predicted the basis of the future                quality assurance process. | en | 
| dc.language | en | de | 
| dc.subject.other | qualitative research; subject review; teaching quality; |  | 
| dc.title | Did the market force Subject Review? | en | 
| dc.description.review | begutachtet (peer reviewed) | de | 
| dc.description.review | peer reviewed | en | 
| dc.source.journal | Active Learning in Higher Education | de | 
| dc.source.volume | 6 | de | 
| dc.source.issue | 1 | de | 
| dc.subject.thesoz | Interview | de | 
| dc.subject.thesoz | interview | en | 
| dc.identifier.urn | urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-230895 | de | 
| dc.date.modified | 2011-03-01T06:37:00Z | de | 
| dc.rights.licence | PEER Licence Agreement (applicable only to documents from PEER project) | de | 
| dc.rights.licence | PEER Licence Agreement (applicable only to documents from PEER project) | en | 
| ssoar.contributor.institution | http://www.peerproject.eu/ | de | 
| internal.status | -1 | de | 
| internal.identifier.thesoz | 10037913 |  | 
| dc.type.stock | article | de | 
| dc.type.document | journal article | en | 
| dc.type.document | Zeitschriftenartikel | de | 
| dc.source.pageinfo | 73-86 |  | 
| internal.identifier.journal | 8 | de | 
| internal.identifier.document | 32 |  | 
| dc.identifier.doi | https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787405046848 | de | 
| dc.description.pubstatus | Postprint | en | 
| dc.description.pubstatus | Postprint | de | 
| internal.identifier.licence | 7 |  | 
| internal.identifier.pubstatus | 2 |  | 
| internal.identifier.review | 1 |  | 
| internal.check.abstractlanguageharmonizer | CERTAIN |  | 
| internal.check.languageharmonizer | CERTAIN_RETAINED |  |