PARTES ANATÓMICAS Y NOMBRES COMUNES DEL POLLO

This project raised the question of the impact of tracking, and reported some encouraging findings with regard to enhancement of learning provision and services, and the improvement of institutional governance and management. However, it was beyond the scope of the present project to explore this in more detail. It would therefore be important to carry out a more systematic impact assessment of tracking, both at institutional and national level. Similarly, it will be vital to ensure a wide distribution and discussion of the project findings, also for a better understanding of how to develop further tracking approaches and where to allocate scarce financial and human resources. A future initiative organised among institutions could, for example, compare tracking initiatives and also assess expected and actual outcomes.

5. Shared approaches

One important question of principles is whether and how better synergies could be developed beyond the level of individual institutions, in order to combine the advantages to be derived from both institutional and national approaches to tracking. This could help institutions to make best use of limited resources, to ensure that well-designed and sustainable approaches are in place, are visible and recognised, with a relatively high response rate and good data quality. Such shared approaches could also contribute to data collection at national level, and allow for interinstitutional benchmarking and collaboration in various areas, including joint research initiatives. In addition to the common approach followed, each institution could develop complementary measures that address their own specific needs. The success of such joint ventures depends to a large extent on the quality of the respective collaborations or partnerships, how they are developed, and to what extent they respect institutional autonomy and support each institution in reaching their goals. As the report demonstrates, there is the possibility of partnering with national bodies, but also through networks of universities or with research institutions. These existing initiatives should be further investigated.

6. Risks and perils of tracking

There is a danger of overburdening tracking, e.g. through incentive funding that may have perverse effects, and fail to achieve its purpose of quality enhancement. However, without any external pressure, it may be difficult for an institution to maintain and resource tracking. Overall, there could be a danger that in those cases where tracking is obligatory it leads to tension between the national and the institutional level rather than to a common understanding and the development of collaborative approaches, as suggested above. Linking tracking more closely to quality assurance might be an appropriate solution.

There is little doubt that the increased possibilities offered by tracking will also enhance the possibilities for misuse. As soon as data is published it falls in the public domain, receives attention and can be ranked and rated. Pressure for ‘transparency’ is growing, but figures resulting from tracking cannot provide clear and easy answers, and have to be looked at in context and interpreted: e.g. are employment rates and salary levels related to the quality of teaching, or rather to the overall employment situation and the social background of students. This is not an argument against tracking but in its favour, because – if applied properly – it would contextualise results, and complement them with additional information, and thus contribute to explaining the complex realities behind the numbers.

There are open questions as to what are the limits of tracking, in particular given the new technological possibilities linked to mass communication and commercial media. These issues have not been addressed by this project, and are certainly not yet at the top of the agenda, at least not in Europe. A few examples, however, indicate that many of the techniques applied by the consumer industry are principally also being applied by or to universities: e.g. some institutions are experimenting with ‘electronic advisory tools’ which propose courses on the basis of historic data of other students with a similar profile48_{. Student performance} and study habits can be tracked via their computer access, and their electronic student cards, for example.

58

Thus, the final chapter on tracking most certainly still has to be written, given the fast development of and trends in data collection and management, the growing use of social media, and the increasing role that data use and data protection will play in the future.

While the frontline was traditionally between the individual on the one side and the state and institutions on the other side, commercial enterprises that draw on voluntary data provision are playing an increasingly important role. The report considered mainly tracking initiatives conducted by national bodies and universities themselves. However, there are a few private providers that started offering their services. This is an issue that needs careful monitoring with regard to the consequences (e.g. regarding ownership of data, increasing dependency of the institution on external services and cost implications). It is worth noting that while the focus of the project was on Europe there were occasional examples both of cutting-edge technical developments and new business models originating in the US, and also words of warning. These initiatives are not yet widespread in Europe as European higher education remains in the first instance a public responsibility as does its funding.

As this report has tried to demonstrate, tracking is not only about numbers and factual information, but relates to the many issues that are vital for higher education at institutional and policy level; it also raises the question of which indicators institutions and policy makers should be considering. From this perspective it is to be very much hoped that the results presented here will contribute to a broad European debate on the issue, and stimulate collaborative action between institutions and between public authorities and institutions ultimately in the interests of improving the educational experience of present and future cohorts of students.

59