Journal of Science & Technology Policy | Volume 1Issue 2 | Publish date : Saturday, July 25, 2009
A Study of the Existing and the Desired State of the “Scientific Evaluation System” in Iran;Emphasizing the Higher Education Sector

communication technology (ICI) and knowledge economy have increased the importance of the quality debate in the Scientific System . However, there is no comprehensive system for evaluating of the quality of “knowledge prodution system established” in Iran .This requires the consensus of scholars and policy makers ,and should be based on international scientific and academic principles and norms, while being relevant to the national context. Anderson, Billing, Busters, Maassen, Tomusk, Vander Wende, Kouwenaar, Vlasceanu , Bazargan and many other researchers at the national and international levels have studied the components of the Scientific Systems and Higher Education Evaluation. By employing a historical , comparative and qualitative research method, This article has developed an appropriate model for a higher education accreditation system (including internal and external evaluation) based on a nonagon model. The historical study shows that quality in Iran’s higher education has always been faced with certain structural and ideo-political obstacles in the form of a huge governmental bureaucracy, a petro-political economy and weak institutions, so that rational and liberalization artivities were often feeble and vulnerable, generally encountering difficult structural challenges as unfinished projects. Using a problem/solution model of categorizing the main challenges of Scientific Evaluation System in Iran, this article proposes nine essential steps for encountering with the afore-mentioned challenges and establishing a comprehensive system for the evaluation of the quality in higher education this includes the four levels of 1. University information system ,2.evaluation system university,3.external evaluation and accreditation, and 4. monitoring the national scientific system .The desired objective of evaluation quality and improvement of the will be only obtained through government playing a supportive and facilitative role of the in developing the required infrastructures for national monitoring of the scientific system ;emphasizing internal initiatives of the universities and the scientific institutions themselves in a competitive sphere at both national and international levels.


Higher education
Evaluation
Challenges
ُُُSolutions
scientific system

مقصود فراستخواه

 
Name & Family : Email :  
Advice :
 



Score:
Full text
 
Comment: 0
Indexed In:
Search : 26
Status :
Article ID: 535062
Publish Date: Saturday, July 25, 2009
View: 223
  • Corresponding Author:
  • References:
    • ابیلی، خدایار (1376) ارزشیابی ماهیت نظارت و ارزیابی جاری در آموزش عالی غیرپزشکی کشور. در؛ خلیجی محسن و محمدمهدی فرقانی (ویراستاران) مجموعه مقالات نخستین سمینار آموزش عالی در ایران، جلد دوم، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی.
    • بازرگان عباس(1380)، ارزشيابي آموزشي(مفاهيم,الگوها, فرايند عملياتي)؛ تهران: انتشارات سمت.
    • بازرگان عباس و همکاران (1379) رویکرد مناسب ارزیابی درونی برای ارتقاء مستمر کیفیت گروههای آموزشی در دانشگاههای علوم پزشکی. مجله روان‌شناسی و علوم تربیتی دانشگاه تهران. دوره جدید سال 5: 1-27
    • بولا، ه.س. (1362) ارزیابی آموزشی و کاربرد آن در سوادآموزی تابعی. ترجمه عباس بازرگان، نشر دانشگاهی.
    • فراستخواه، مقصودو همکاران(1385)تدوین وارائۀ الگویی برای ارزیابی و اعتبار سنجی آموزش عالی بر مبنای تجارب جهانی و ایرانی. پایان نامۀ دکتری  رشتۀ آموزش عالی دانشکدۀ علوم تربیتی 1385،زیر نظر دکتر عباس بازرگان،با مشاورۀ دکترمحمود قاضی طبا طبایی ودکتر کارولوکس. دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.
    • فراستخواه، مقصود،عباس بازرگان وکارو لوکس(1386) نقشه ای شناختی در بارۀ چالشهای اجتماعی کیفیت آموزش عالی  در ایران.نامۀ علوم اجتماعی، دیماه 1386،ش30.
    • فراستخواه، مقصود،عباس بازرگان ومحمود قاضی طباطبایی(1386) تحلیل مقایسه ای نظامهای تضمین کیفیت.فصلنامۀ پژوهش وبرنامه ریزی آموزش عالی. ،ش44.
    • محمدي رضا و همكاران (1384) ارزشيابي كيفيت در آموزش عالي؛ مفاهيم، اصول، روش‌ها و معيارها، سازمان سنجش آموزش كشور.

     

    • Anderson, Gray (1999) Fundamentals of educational research. London, open university.
    • Billing David (2004) International camparisons and trends in external quality assurance of higher education: Commonality or diversity? Higher Education, 47: 113-137.
    • Busters, Jargon (2001) Fourth generation evaluation. New York, Mc Graw Hill.
    • Eaton Judith S. (2006) Before the “The Secretary of Education’s Commission on the Future.
    • Farasatkhah ,Maghsoud(2008) Quality Challenge in Iran’s Higher Education: A Historical Review. Iranian Studies,Volume 41, number 2, April 2008
    • INQAAHE (2003) Quality assurance agencies. “International Network for Quality Assurance Agencies in Higher Education” and “International Association of University Presidents”. Dublin. Higher Education and Training Awards Council.
    • Maassen, P.A.M. (1997). ‘Quality in European higher education: Recent trends and their historic roots’, European Journal of Education 32(2), 111-127.
    • Tomusk, V. (1995). ‘Nobody can better distroy your higher education than yourself’: Critical remarks about quality assessment and funding in Estonian higher education’, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 20(1), 115-124.
    • Tomusk, V. (1997). ‘External quality assurance in Estonian higher education: Its glory, take-off and crash’, Quality in Higher Education 3(2), 173-181.
    • Tomusk, V. (2000). ‘When East meets West: Decontextualizing the quality of Eastern European higher education’, Quality in Higher Education 6(3), 175-185.
    • Van der Wende, M. and Kouwenaar, K. (1993). The Quality Debate: A Discussion on the Contribution of International Cooperation to Higher Education. Limburg: University of Limburg. Quoted in Vroeijenstijn, A.I. (1995).
    • Vlasceanu, L.(1993). ‘Quality assurance: Issues and policy implication’, Higher Education in Europe 18(3), 27-41.