Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Vol. 4 No. 1 (2016)
Economics of Higher Education

Thematic Articles

Accountability of University: Transition of Public Higher Education

https://doi.org/10.15678/EBER.2016.040102

Published 2016-03-24

  • Łukasz Sułkowski

Łukasz Sułkowski
University of Social Sciences in Łódź, Jagiellonian University in Kraków

Abstract

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.

Keywords

accountability, university, higher education institutions (HEIs), economics of higher education

PDF

References

  1. Allan, A., & Allan, M. M. (2000). The South African truth and reconciliation commission as a thera-peutic tool. Behavioral sciences & the law, 18(4), 459-477.
  2. 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.
  3. Ball R., Wilkinson R., The use and abuse of performance indicators in UK higher education, Higher Education, 1994, no 27.
  4. Barnett, R. (2000). University knowledge in an age of supercomplexity. Higher education, 40(4), 409-422.
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  8. Bovens, M. (2007). Analysing and assessing accountability: a conceptual framework1. European law journal, 13(4), 447-468.
  9. Brint, S. (2005). Creating the future: New directions in American research universities. Minerva, 43(1), 23-50.
  10. Burbules N., Torres C., Globalisation and Education: Critical Perspectives, Routledge: New York 2000.
  11. 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.
  12. Clark, B. R. (1998). The entrepreneurial university: Demand and response 1. Tertiary Education & Management, 4(1), 5-16.
  13. Connolly, C., & Hyndman, N. (2004). Performance reporting: a comparative study of British and Irish charities. The British Accounting Review, 36(2), 127-154.
  14. Cooper, S. M., & Owen, D. L. (2007). Corporate social reporting and stakeholder accountability: The missing link. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 32(7), 649-667.
  15. 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.
  16. Cuenin S., The Case of Performance Indicators in Universities: An International Survey, Internation-al Journal of Institutional Management, 1987, vol. 11, no 2.
  17. Darling-Hammond L., Snyder J.,Accountability for Resources and Outcomes: An Introduc-tion, Education Policy Analysis Archives, 2015, 23(20). http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v23.2024, EPAA/AAPE Special Series on A New Paradigm for Educational Accountability: Accountability for Resources and Outcomes.
  18. 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.
  19. Dekker, S. (2011). The criminalization of human error in aviation and healthcare: A review. Safety science, 49(2), 121-127.
  20. Dochy F., Segers M., Selecting Indicators on the Basis of Essential Criteria and Appropriate Assess-ment Methods or a Quality Assurance System, Paper prepared for theCHEPS Conference, "Quality Assessment in Higher Education" at Utrecht, March 16th,1990.
  21. Dubnick, M. (2005). Accountability and the promise of performance: In search of the mechanisms. Public Performance & Management Review, 28(3), 376-417.
  22. Dubnick, M., Accountability as Cultural Keyword, University of New Hampshire, Prepared for a presentation at a seminar of theResearch Colloquium on Good Governance, Netherlands In-stitute of Government, VU University, Amsterdam, May 9 2012.
  23. Eisenstadt, S. N. (1959). Bureaucracy, bureaucratization, and debureaucratization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 302-320.
  24. Elton, L.B., Warning Signs, Times Higher Education Supplement, 1987, 11.9.87.
  25. Fielden, J., Abercromby, K., UNESCO Higher Education Indicators Study: Accountability and Interna-tional Cooperationin the Renewal of Higher Education, Paris: UNESCO 2000
  26. 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.
  27. 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.
  28. Georgia Professional Standards Commission, Lexicon, Atlanta: GAPSC, 2003, www.gapsc.com/help.asp.
  29. 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#intro
  30. Habermas, J. (2001). The public sphere: An encyclopedia article. [in:] M. G. Durham, D. M. Kellner (Eds.) Media and Cultural Studies: Keyworks, , Wiley-BlackwellMedia: 73-78.
  31. Habermas, J., & Rehg, W. (2001). Constitutional democracy: a paradoxical union of contradictory principles?. Political theory, 29(6), 766-781.
  32. Hauptman A.M., Higher Education Finance: Trends and Issues [in:] J.J.F. Forest, P.G. Altbach, (ed.), International Handbook of Higher Education, 2006, no 6, Springer, Netherlands.
  33. Hatry, H. P. (2006). Performance measurement: Getting results. The Urban Insitute: Washington.
  34. Higher Education Funding Council for England,Guide to Performance Indicators in Higher Educa-tion: Learning and Teaching,Bristol: HEFCE, 2001, www.hefce.ac.uk/, Learn-ing/PerfInd/2001/guide.htm.
  35. Hood, C. (1995). The “New Public Management†in the 1980s: variations on a theme. Accounting, organizations and society, 20(2), 93-109.
  36. http://www.linguee.com/english-polish/translation/accountability.html, 14.08.2015.
  37. Hummel, R. P. (2008). The Bureaucratic Experience: The Post-Modern Challenge. Sharpe: Armonk, NY.
  38. Jarratt Report, Report of Steering Committee for Efficiency Studies in Universities, CVCP, London 1985.
  39. Johnes J., Taylor J., Performance Indicators in Higher Education, SRHE 1989.
  40. Kassel, D. S. (2008). Performance, accountability, and the debate over rules. Public Administration Review, 68(2), 241-252.
  41. Kaufman, H. (1967). The forest ranger: A study in administrative behavior. Resources for the Fu-ture: Washington.
  42. Kaplow, L. (1992). Rules versus standards: An economic analysis. Duke Law Journal 42(3), 557-629.
  43. Kerwin, C. M. (2003) Rulemaking: How Government Agencies Write Law and Make Policy. 3rd ed., Washington, DC: CQ Press.
  44. Ling P., Autonomy Versus Accountability: Measuring University Teaching Performance,Swinburne University, Australia 2005.
  45. Malone, M. F. T. (2010). Does Dirty Harry have the answer? Citizen support for the rule of law in Central America. Public Integrity, 13(1), 59-80.
  46. Markoff, J. (1975). Governmental bureaucratization: general processes and an anomalous case. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 17(04), 479-503.
  47. Mutula S., University Education in Kenya; current developments and future outlook, International Journal of Educational Management, 2002, 16(3), 109-119.
  48. O'Donnell, G. A. (1998). Horizontal accountability in new democracies. Journal of democracy, 9(3), 112-126.
  49. O'Neill, O. (2002). A question of trust: The BBC Reith Lectures 2002. Cambridge University Press.
  50. Parker L.D., From privatised to hybrid corporatised higher education: a global financial manage-ment discourse, "Financial Accountability & Management, 2012, 28.3.
  51. Performance Indicators in Higher Education, Report by HMI (ref 14/91/NS), HMSO, DES 1991.
  52. Power M. (1999) The Audit Society. Rituals of Verification. Oxford University Press.
  53. Rabovsky, T. M. (2012). Accountability in higher education: Exploring impacts on state budgets and institutional spending patterns. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(4), 675-700.
  54. Reindl T., Reyna R., Complete to Compete: From Information to Action-Revamping Higher Educa-tion Accountability Systems, NGA Center for Best Practices, 2011.
  55. Sahney S., Banwet D., Karunes, S. (2004) Conceptualising Total QualityManagement in Higher Education , The TQM Magazine, 16(2), 145-149.
  56. Sandu E-A. (i in.), Considerations on implementation of a social accountability management system model in higher education, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2014, no 142.
  57. Sarkin, J. (2000). Promoting justice, truth and reconciliation in transitional societies: Evaluating Rwanda's approach in the new millennium of using community based Gacaca tribunals to deal with the past. In International Law FORUM du droit international (Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 112-121).
  58. Schedler, A., Diamond, L., & Plattner, M. F. (1999). Restraining the state: conflicts and agents of accountability. The self-restraining state: Power and accountability in new democracies, Boul-der: London, 333-50.
  59. Schwartz, R., & Sulitzeanu-Kenan, R. (2002). The politics of accountability: Institutionalising internal auditing in Israel. Financial Accountability & Management, 18(3), 211-231.
  60. Spee A., Bormans R., Performance Indicators in Government-Institutional Relations: The Conceptual Framework, Higher Education Management, 1992, 42.
  61. Sporn, B. (2006). Governance and administration. In P. Altbach & J. Forest (Eds.), International handbook of higher education. Part one (pp. 141-157). Dordrecht: Springer.
  62. Stinchcombe, A. L. (2001). When formality works: Authority and abstraction in law and organiza-tions. University of Chicago Press.
  63. Sułkowski, Ł. (2016). Kultura akademicka - koniec utopii?, PWN.
  64. System for Adult Basic Education Support (SABES),Glossary of Useful Terms, Boston 2003, http:www.sabes.org/ assessment/glossary.htm.
  65. The 2015 Inside Higher End Survey of Community College Presidents, a study by Gallup and Inside Higher End, ed. S. Jaschik, D. Lederman, 2015.
  66. The Development of Higher Education until the 1990s, Cmnd 9524, HMSO, DES 1985.
  67. Tomkins C., Green R., An experiment in the use of data envelopment analysis for evaluating the efficiency of UK university departments of accounting, Financial Accountability & Management, 1988, 4.2.
  68. University of South Australia, Planning and Development Division,Internal Performance Indicators, Adelaide: UNISA 2003, www.unisa.edu.au/FIN/Budget/ glossary.htm.
  69. Van Damme D., Standards and Indicators in Institutional and Programme Accreditation in Higher Education: A Conceptual Framework and a Proposal[in:] L. Vlăsceanu, L.C. Barrows(eds.), Indi-cators for Institutional and Programme Accreditation in Higher/Tertiary Education, Bucharest: UNESCO-CEPES, 2004
  70. Vlasceanu, L., Grunberg, L., & Parlea, D. (2004). Quality assurance and accreditation: A glossary of basic terms and definitions. Bucharest: Unesco-Cepes.
  71. Welsh J., Dey S. (2002), Quality measurement and quality assurance in higher education, Quality Assurance in Education, 2002, 10(1), 17-25.
  72. Zbaracki, M. J. (1998). The rhetoric and reality of total quality management. Administrative science quarterly, 602-636.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.