was a need to define the concept of measuring ‘added-value’ in HE, an area which has similarities to the role of non-nurses, as existing practices seem to be acknowledged for their limitations, but no concrete solutions are suggested. Storey
81 (1993) supported this view, when acknowledging the debate on its use as the most significant performance indicator for mass Higher Education. A report by the Polytechnics and Colleges Funding Council (PCFC) and the Council for National Academic Awards (CNAA) in 1990, defined value added in Higher Education “as a measure of student achievement, as indicated by exit qualifications, which takes into account differential inputs, as indicated by entry qualifications” (PCFC/CNAA 1990 p. ‘Summary’). In nursing the idea of measuring the exit qualification could refer not so much to a degree classification but to the ability to satisfy the Benchmarking Statements for practice (QAA 2001), a lot more complicated than a fail to a first.
The main cause for concern with this measurement, however, are the multiple factors impacting on the students’ experience (Gibson 1993). Lund and Jackson writing in 2000, ten years later, stated that confidence in this approach was still not universally shared and as an indicator of performance it remains controversial (Lund and Jackson 2000). Even the PCFC/CNAA (1990) acknowledged that it used a very narrow definition of value added due to practical considerations, and broader conceptions based on personal attributes and employability were not considered.
The concept of ‘added-value’ sits within the area of quality measurement in HE, as defined by Kekale (2000) as a structured activity leading to a judgment. The social, cultural and economic enterprise of HE leads to the proliferation of quality evaluation methods as discussed by Barnett (1994), due to the problem of not one method being able to serve all stakeholders. Areas to consider include; public accountability, resource allocation, managerial control, sensitivity to students,
82 improving the quality of learning and to encourage collective responsibility for self- development. Barnett (1994) goes on to discuss the deep seated beliefs about what counts as quality and the overall purpose of HE, especially pertinent when considering vocational programmes such as nursing. No system, he stated, can be value free and completely technical when attempting to measure truths without any attempt to factor in where the power in the system lies. This view is supported by Kekale (2000) who discussed how some quality assessment methods suit some disciplines more than others.
The idea that how quality is measured depends on the values a discipline adheres to can also be related to the debates about the use of added-value measurements. Morley (2004) stated that economics as a discipline is the dominate influence on higher education policy in Britain and this is reflected in the emphasis on ‘value added’ and ‘best value’ approaches. She suggested that this is reflected in concerns about institutions gaining the best value for students based on their resources and student intakes, and continuously improving their position and meeting goals and targets. It would suggest that this view is very relevant to nurse education as external stakeholders such as the DH continuously set and change targets for the NHS, having the effect of HE providers having to reflect this in the curriculum. Morley (2004) proposed that this has resulted in the state not been a provider of public services but a regulator and auditor.
Although Narayanasamy (1992) suggested that the concept, if not the practice, of measuring value added is simple as long as the individuals indentified are identical in every respect, the approaches used are numerous. Also as discussed by Morley
83 (2004), it could be argued that the point of education is to suggest a new order of ideas and relationships, and to transform both the student and the discipline. The need for the measurement of value added in assuming a stable performance at the point of entry and exit seems to contradict this purpose of education.
In considering ‘value added’ approaches Tam (2001) proposed that a value added approach to quality measurement is advancement from the input-output analysis. He acknowledged however, the potential difficulties in trying to collect information on the quality of HE to change the students from their competences at entrance to their abilities at graduation. Quantitative data can provide useful information and there are many models tested and tried in practice, but Tam (2001) argued that they can’t explain what caused the differences and that looking at the students’ experience is the major factor. Morley (2004) also discussed the popularity of performance indicators that replace substantive judgments with formulaic and algorithmic representations. Even reviews that use multiple methods to assess quality, she suggested, have elements of positivism with reviews claiming they can unearth ‘truths’ about the complexities of organisational life with looking at the ‘right’ document’ and ‘right’ people (Morley 2004).
An example of this approach is the Major Reviews of Healthcare Programmes (Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) 2003). Morley (2004) suggested that feedback on performance in this way is frequently incomplete, partial and open to a range of interpretations. This opinion relates to the methodological exploration for this thesis especially in relation to the changing philosophical and practical stance of an academic’s role. The various aspects are measured differently, examples from the
84 author’s experience include teaching being measured by hours and staff student ratios, and research measured by quality indicators, such as the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE), which is about the peer assessment of the quality of research around stated ideals. In relation to measuring staff performance and the lecturer, Narayanasamy (1992) suggested that indicators should focus attention on functions such as the resources used, the quality of services, staff performance and the support services. Tools he suggested could include student evaluations, peer review, classroom visits and various types of documentation.
4.4 Informing the Research Methodology: A Theoretical Framework for Measuring