A Meta-analysis of Policy Processes

  • Jon Yorke
  • Lesley Vidovich
Part of the Policy Implications of Research in Education book series (PIRE, volume 7)


Chapter 10 draws together findings from across the different policy contexts (influences, policy text production, practices/effects and longer term outcomes) of higher education quality and standards policies and the different research sites extending between global (OECD), national (Australia, UK and US) and local (university) levels in this study. It offers a meta-analysis and discussion in relation to the literature. It also generates a series of 15 propositions, derived from the specific findings, to move towards enhanced theorisation about quality and standards policies in higher education. The construct of a ‘glo-na-cal agency heuristic’ is used to further explicate the meta-themes of ideology and power which extend across the policy trajectories under investigation in this book. The chapter concludes with an examination of the utility of policy network theory, by critiquing both its strengths and weaknesses, and the development of potential new framings for policy analysis in globalising times.


Policy analysis Meta-analysis Policy processes Ideology Actor power Network theory 


  1. Advancing Quality in Higher Education Reference Group (2012). Development of performance measures. Australian Government. Accessed 11 May 2016.
  2. Alderman, G. (2009). Defining and measuring academic standards: A British perspective. Higher Education Management and Policy, 21(3), 1–14. doi: 10.1787/hemp-21-5ksf24ssz1wc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alexiadou, N. (2014). Policy learning and Europeanisation in education: The governance of a field and the transfer of knowledge. In A. Nordin & D. Sundberg (Eds.), Transnational policy flows in European education: The making and governing of knowledge in the education policy field (pp. 123–140). Oxford, UK: Symposium Books.Google Scholar
  4. Allais, S. (2011). ‘Economics imperialism’, education policy and educational theory. Journal of Education Policy, 27(2), 253–274. doi: 10.1080/02680939.2011.602428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Althaus, C., Bridgman, P., & Davis, G. (2013). The Australian policy handbook. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  6. Amrein-Beardsley, A., Berliner, D. C., & Rideau, S. (2010). Cheating in the first, second, and third degree: Educators’ responses to high-stakes testing. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 18(14), 1–36. doi: 10.14507/epaa.v18n14.2010.Google Scholar
  7. Arum, R., & Roksa, J. (2011). Academically adrift: Limited learning on college campuses. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  8. Australian Government (2009). Transforming Australia’s higher education system. Canberra: Author.Google Scholar
  9. Australian Learning and Teaching Council (2010). Learning and Teaching Academic Standards project: Final report. Author. Accessed 11 May 2016.
  10. Ball, S. J. (1994). Education reform: A critical and post-structural approach. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Ball, S. J. (1998). Big policies/small world: An introduction to international perspectives in education policy. Comparative Education, 34(2), 119–130. doi: 10.1080/03050069828225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ball, S. J. (2003). The teacher’s soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of Education Policy, 18(2), 215–228. doi: 10.1080/0268093022000043065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ball, S. J. (2009). Education reform, teacher professionalism and the end of authenticity. In M. Simons, M. Olssen, & M. A. Peters (Eds.), Re-reading education policies: A handbook studying the policy agenda of the 21st century (pp. 699–714). Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  14. Ball, S. J. (2012a). Global Education Inc.: New policy networks and the neoliberal imaginary. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Ball, S. J. (2012b). Performativity, commodification and commitment: An I-spy guide to the neoliberal university. British Journal of Educational Studies, 60(1), 17–28. doi: 10.1080/00071005.2011.650940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ball, S. J., & Exley, S. (2010). Making policy with ‘good ideas’: Policy networks and the ‘intellectuals’ of New Labour. Journal of Education Policy, 25(2), 151–169. doi: 10.1080/02680930903486125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Barker, B. (2010). The pendulum swings: Transforming school reform. Oakhill: Trentham Books.Google Scholar
  18. Bay, U. (2011). Unpacking neo-liberal technologies of government in Australian higher education social work departments. Journal of Social Work, 11(2), 222–236. doi: 10.1177/1468017310386696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Bekhradnia, B. (2013). “Higher education in the UK – punching above our weight.” Really? Higher Education Policy Institute. Accessed 11 May 2016.
  20. Benjamin, R. (2010, December 8). No substitute for hard evidence. The Australian. Accessed 11 May 2016.
  21. Bird, S. M., Cox, D., Farewell, V. T., Goldstein, H., Holt, T., & Smith, P. C. (2005). Performance indicators: Good, bad, and ugly. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 168(1), 1–27. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-985X.2004.00333.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Bloxham, S. (2009). Marking and moderation in the UK: False assumptions and wasted resources. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(2), 209–220. doi: 10.1080/02602930801955978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Bloxham, S., & Price, M. (2015). External examining: Fit for purpose? Studies in Higher Education, 40(2), 195–211. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2013.823931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Bloxham, S., Boyd, P., & Orr, S. (2011). Mark my words: The role of assessment criteria in UK higher education grading practices. Studies in Higher Education, 36(6), 655–670. doi: 10.1080/03075071003777716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Bottery, M. (2006). Education and globalization: Redefining the role of the educational professional. Educational Review, 58(1), 95–113. doi: 10.1080/00131910500352804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Bottery, M. (2009). Critical professional or branded technician? In M. Simons, M. Olssen, & M. A. Peters (Eds.), Re-reading education policies: A handbook studying the policy agenda of the 21st century (pp. 715–732). Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  27. Bøyum, S. (2014). Fairness in education – a normative analysis of OECD policy documents. Journal of Education Policy, 29(6), 856–870. doi: 10.1080/02680939.2014.899396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Bradley, D., Noonan, P., Nugent, H., & Scales, B. (2008). Review of Australian higher education: Final report. Canberra: Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.Google Scholar
  29. Brown, R. (2010). The current brouhaha about standards in England. Quality in Higher Education, 16(2), 129–137. doi: 10.1080/13538322.2010.487699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Brown, R. (2011). Markets and non-markets. In R. Brown (Ed.), Higher education and the market (pp. 6–19). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Burke, J. C. (2005). The three corners of the accountability triangle. Serving all, submitting to none. In J. C. Burke (Ed.), Achieving accountability in higher education. Balancing public, academic and market demands (pp. 296–324). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  32. Cahill, D., Stilwell, F. J. B., & Edwards, L. (2012). Neoliberalism: Beyond the free market. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  33. Caldwell, A. (2012, January 18). NAPLAN cheating cases on the rise. ABC News. Accessed 11 May 2016.
  34. Cameron, J. W. (2004). Report on public sector agencies: Results of special reviews and other studies. Victorian Auditor-General’s Office. Accessed 11 May 2016.
  35. Canaan, J. E., & Schumar, W. (2008). Higher education in the era of globalisation and neoliberalism. In J. E. Canaan & W. Schumar (Eds.), Structure and agency in the neoliberal university (pp. 1–30). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. Cantwell, B., & Maldonado‐Maldonado, A. (2009). Four stories: Confronting contemporary ideas about globalisation and internationalisation in higher education. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 7(3), 289–306. doi: 10.1080/14767720903166103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Carless, D. (2009). Trust, distrust and their impact on assessment reform. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(1), 79–89. doi: 10.1080/02602930801895786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Chesters, J., & Watson, L. (2012). Understanding the persistence of inequality in higher education: Evidence from Australia. Journal of Education Policy, 28(2), 198–215. doi: 10.1080/02680939.2012.694481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Chilcott, T. (2011, May 7). Queensland’s NAPLAN test cheating shame. The Courier Mail. Accessed 11 May 2016.
  40. Coaldrake, P., & Stedman, L. (2013). Raising the stakes: Gambling with the future of universities. St. Lucia: University of Queensland Press.Google Scholar
  41. Coates, H., & Richardson, S. (2012). An international assessment of bachelor degree graduates’ learning outcomes. Higher Education Management and Policy, 23(3), 1–19. doi: 10.1787/hemp-23-5k9h5xkx575c.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Colebatch, H. (2006). Beyond the policy cycle. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  43. Costa, E. (2011). The OECD’s ‘Programme for International Student Assessment’ (PISA): A ‘glonacal’ regulation tool of educational policies. Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research, Berlin, Germany, September 2011.Google Scholar
  44. Craven, G. (2010, June 23). Taking the toxic out of TEQSA. The Australian. Accessed 11 May 2016.
  45. Dale, R. (1999). Specifying globalization effects on national policy: A focus on the mechanisms. Journal of Education Policy, 14(1), 1–17. doi: 10.1080/026809399286468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Dawkins, J. (1988). Higher education: A policy statement. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.Google Scholar
  47. De Lissovoy, N., & Mclaren, P. (2003). Educational ‘accountability’ and the violence of capital: A Marxian reading. Journal of Education Policy, 18(2), 131–143. doi: 10.1080/0268093022000043092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Dean, M. (2010). Governmentality: Power and rule in modern society (2nd ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  49. Denniss, R. (2006). Policy research and organisational demands. In H. Colebatch (Ed.), Beyond the policy cycle (pp. 228–239). Sydney: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  50. Department of Education (2014a). 2013 Student summary. Australian Government. Accessed 12 May 2016.
  51. Department of Education (2014b). Upholding quality: Quality indicators for learning and teaching. Accessed 10 Oct 2014.
  52. Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (2009). An indicator framework for higher education performance funding: Discussion paper. Author. Accessed 12 May 2016.
  53. Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (2011). Development of performance measurement instruments in higher education: Discussion paper. Australian Government. Accessed 12 May 2016.
  54. Dill, D. D., & Beerkens, M. (2010). Market regulation of academic quality. In D. D. Dill & M. Beerkens (Eds.), Public policy for academic quality: Analyses of innovative policy instruments (pp. 55–59). London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Dobbins, M., & Martens, K. (2011). Towards an education approach à la finlandaise? French education policy after PISA. Journal of Education Policy, 27(1), 23–43. doi: 10.1080/02680939.2011.622413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Enns, C. (2015). Transformation or continuation? A critical analysis of the making of the post-2015 education agenda. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 13(3), 369–387. doi: 10.1080/14767724.2014.959894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Exley, S., & Ball, S. J. (2014). Neo-liberalism and English education. In D. Turner & H. Yolcu (Eds.), Neoliberal education reforms: A global analysis (pp. 13–31). Hoboken: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  58. Feniger, Y., & Lefstein, A. (2014). How not to reason with PISA data: An ironic investigation. Journal of Education Policy, 29(6), 845–855. doi: 10.1080/02680939.2014.892156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Foley, B., & Goldstein, H. (2012). Measuring success: League tables in the public sector. The British Academy. Accessed 12 May 2016.
  60. Frankham, J. (2006). Network utopias and alternative entanglements for educational research and practice. Journal of Education Policy, 21(6), 661–677. doi: 10.1080/02680930600969191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Frolich, N. (2011). Multi-layered accountability. Performance-based funding of universities. Public Administration, 89(3), 840–859. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2010.01867.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Gale, T., & Tranter, D. (2011). Social justice in Australian higher education policy: An historical and conceptual account of student participation. Critical Studies in Education, 52(1), 29–46. doi: 10.1080/17508487.2011.536511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Gillies, D. (2011). Agile bodies: A new imperative in neoliberal governance. Journal of Education Policy, 26(2), 207–223. doi: 10.1080/02680939.2010.508177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Giroux, H. A. (2008). Against the terror of neoliberalism: Politics beyond the age of greed. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.Google Scholar
  65. Grek, S. (2009). Governing by numbers: The PISA ‘effect’ in Europe. Journal of Education Policy, 24(1), 23–37. doi: 10.1080/02680930802412669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Group of Eight (2014). Policy note: Courses and quality assurance in Australian higher education. Group of Eight Australia. Retrieved from Accessed 12 May 2016.
  67. Gür, B. S., Çelik, Z., & Özoğlu, M. (2011). Policy options for Turkey: A critique of the interpretation and utilization of PISA results in Turkey. Journal of Education Policy, 27(1), 1–21. doi: 10.1080/02680939.2011.595509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Hägg, I., & Wedlin, L. (2013). Standards for quality? A critical appraisal of the Berlin Principles for international rankings of universities. Quality in Higher Education, 19(3), 326–342. doi: 10.1080/13538322.2013.852708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Harvey, D. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  70. Higher Education Funding Council for England. (2008). Counting what is measured or measuring what counts? League tables and their impact on higher education institutions in England. Bristol: HEFCE.Google Scholar
  71. Higher Education Standards Panel (2013). Draft standards for course design and learning outcomes. Australian Government. Accessed 12 May 2016.
  72. Higher Education Standards Panel (2014). The Higher Education Standards Panel. Accessed 12 May 2016.
  73. Houston, D., & Paewai, S. (2013). Knowledge, power and meanings shaping quality assurance in higher education: A systemic critique. Quality in Higher Education, 19(3), 261–282. doi: 10.1080/13538322.2013.849786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Hursh, D. (2008). High-stakes testing and the decline of teaching and learning: The real crisis in education. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  75. Hursh, D. (2013). Raising the stakes: High-stakes testing and the attack on public education in New York. Journal of Education Policy, 28(5), 574–588. doi: 10.1080/02680939.2012.758829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Hyatt, D. (2013). The critical higher education policy discourse analysis framework. In J. Huisman & M. Tight (Eds.), Theory and method in higher education research (pp. 41–59). Bingley: Emerald Insight.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Keen, S. (2006). Non-government organisations in policy. In H. Colebatch (Ed.), Beyond the policy cycle (pp. 27–41). Sydney: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  78. Klenowski, V., & Wyatt-Smith, C. (2011). The impact of high stakes testing: The Australian story. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 19(1), 65–79. doi: 10.1080/0969594x.2011.592972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Knight, P. (2002a). The Achilles’ heel of quality: The assessment of student learning. Quality in Higher Education, 8(1), 107–115. doi: 10.1080/13538320220127506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Knight, P. (2002b). Summative assessment in higher education: Practices in disarray. Studies in Higher Education, 27(3), 275–286. doi: 10.1080/03075070220000662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Knight, P. (2006). The local practices of assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(4), 435–452. doi: 10.1080/02602930600679126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Knight, P., & Page, A. (2007). The assessment of ‘wicked’ competences: Report to the Practice-based Professional Learning Centre. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  83. Krause, K.-L., Scott, G., Aubin, K., Alexander, H., Angelo, T., Campell, S., et al. (2014). Assuring learning and teaching standards through inter-institutional peer review and moderation: Final report of the project. University of Western Sydney. Accessed 12 May 2016.
  84. Lange, B., & Alexiadou, N. (2010). Policy learning and governance of education policy in the EU. Journal of Education Policy, 25(4), 443–463. doi: 10.1080/02680931003782819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Lederman, D., Stratford, M., & Jaschik, S. (2014, February 07). Rating (and berating) the ratings. Inside Higher Ed. Accessed 11 May 2016.
  86. Lingard, B. (1996). Educational policy making in a postmodern state. Australian Educational Researcher, 23(1), 65–91. doi: 10.1007/BF03219613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Lingard, B. (2010). Policy borrowing, policy learning: Testing times in Australian schooling. Critical Studies in Education, 51(2), 129–147. doi: 10.1080/17508481003731026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Lingard, B., & Rawolle, S. (2009). Rescaling and reconstituting education policy. In M. Simons, M. Olssen, & M. A. Peters (Eds.), Re-reading education policies: A handbook studying the policy agenda of the 21st century (pp. 217–234). Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  89. Lingard, B., & Rawolle, S. (2011). New scalar politics: Implications for education policy. Comparative Education, 47(4), 489–502. doi: 10.1080/03050068.2011.555941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Lingard, B., Martino, W., & Rezai-Rashti, G. (2013). Testing regimes, accountabilities and education policy: Commensurate global and national developments. Journal of Education Policy, 28(5), 539–556. doi: 10.1080/02680939.2013.820042.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Marginson, S. (1997). Steering from a distance: Power relations in Australian higher education. Higher Education, 34(1), 63–80. doi: 10.1023/A:1003082922199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Marginson, S. (2009). Globalization, knowledge and competition in higher education. Centre for the Study of Higher Education. Accessed 01 May 2014.
  93. Marginson, S. (2011a). Equity, status and freedom: A note on higher education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 41(1), 23–36. doi:  10.1080/0305764x.2010.549456.Google Scholar
  94. Marginson, S. (2011b). Global position and position-taking in higher education: The case of Australia. In S. Marginson, S. Kaur, & E. Sawir (Eds.), Higher education in the Asia-Pacific (Vol. 36, pp. 375–392, Higher Education Dynamics). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  95. Marginson, S. (2014). University rankings and social science. European Journal of Education, 49(1), 45–59. doi: 10.1111/ejed.12061.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Marginson, S., & Rhoades, G. (2002). Beyond national states, markets and systems of higher education: A glonacal agency heuristic. Higher Education, 43(3), 281–309. doi: 10.1023/A:1014699605875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Martens, K., & Jakobi, A. P. (2010). Mechanisms of OECD governance: International incentives for national policy-making? Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Massaro, V. (2010). Cui bono? The relevance and impact of quality assurance. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 32(1), 17–26. doi: 10.1080/13600800903440527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Massaro, V. (2013). TEQSA and the holy grail of outcomes-based quality assessment. In S. Marginson (Ed.), Tertiary education policy in Australia (pp. 49–57). Melbourne: Centre for the Study of Higher Education.Google Scholar
  100. Massy, W. (2011). Managerial and political strategies for handling accountability. In B. Stensaker & L. Harvey (Eds.), Accountability in higher education: Global perspectives on trust and power (pp. 221–244). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  101. McGaw, B. (2008). The role of the OECD in international comparative studies of achievement. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 15(3), 223–243. doi: 10.1080/09695940802417384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Middlehurst, R. (2014). Higher education research agendas for the coming decade: A UK perspective on the policy–research nexus. Studies in Higher Education, 39(8), 1475–1487. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2014.949538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Moodie, G. (2011). Developing student market in Australia. In R. Brown (Ed.), Higher education and the market (pp. 63–73). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  104. Morton, A. D. (2007). Unravelling Gramsci: Hegemony and passive revolution in the global political economy. London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
  105. Newstead, S., & Dennis, I. (1994). Examiners examined: The reliability of exam marking in psychology. The Psychologist, 7, 216–219.Google Scholar
  106. Nichols, S., & Berliner, D. (2008). Collateral damage: How high-stakes testing corrupts America’s schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
  107. Olssen, M. (2009). Neoliberalism, education and the rise of a global common good. In M. Simons, M. Olssen, & M. A. Peters (Eds.), Re-reading education policies: A handbook studying the policy agenda of the 21st century (pp. 455–480). Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  108. Olssen, M., & Peters, M. A. (2005). Neoliberalism, higher education and the knowledge economy: From the free market to knowledge capitalism. Journal of Education Policy, 20(3), 313–345. doi: 10.1080/02680930500108718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (2013). AHELO feasibility study report: Volume 3 – further insights. Author. Accessed 12 May 2016.
  110. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (2014). Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). Accessed 10 Oct 2014.
  111. Orland, M. (2009). Separate orbits: The distinctive worlds of educational research and policymaking. In G. Sykes, B. Schneider, D. Plank, & T. Ford (Eds.), Handbook of education policy research (pp. 113–128). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  112. Ozga, J. (2009). Governing education through data in England: From regulation to self-evaluation. Journal of Education Policy, 24(2), 149–162. doi: 10.1080/02680930902733121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Ozga, J., & Jones, R. (2006). Travelling and embedded policy: The case of knowledge transfer. Journal of Education Policy, 21(1), 1–17. doi: 10.1080/02680930500391462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Pasura, R. (2014). Neoliberal economic markets in vocational education and training: Shifts in perceptions and practices in private vocational education and training in Melbourne, Australia. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 12(4), 564–582. doi: 10.1080/14767724.2014.906300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Peters, M. (2003). Post-structuralism and Marxism: Education as knowledge capitalism. Journal of Education Policy, 18(2), 115–129. doi: 10.1080/0268093022000043100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Peters, M., & Humes, W. (2003). Editorial: The reception of post-structuralism in educational research and policy. Journal of Education Policy, 18(2), 109–113. doi: 10.1080/0268093022000043119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Piro, J. M. (2008). Foucault and the architecture of surveillance: Creating regimes of power in schools, shrines, and society. Educational Studies, 44(1), 30–46. doi: 10.1080/00131940802225036.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Pitman, T. (2014). Reinterpreting higher education quality in response to policies of mass education: The Australian experience. Quality in Higher Education, 20(3), 348–363. doi: 10.1080/13538322.2014.957944.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Pitman, T., & Vidovich, L. (2012). Recognition of prior learning (RPL) policy in Australian higher education: The dynamics of position-taking. Journal of Education Policy, 27(6), 761–774. doi: 10.1080/02680939.2011.652192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Polesel, J., Rice, S., & Dulfer, N. (2014). The impact of high-stakes testing on curriculum and pedagogy: A teacher perspective from Australia. Journal of Education Policy, 29(5), 640–657. doi: 10.1080/02680939.2013.865082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Price, M., Carroll, J., O’Donovan, B., & Rust, C. (2011). If I was going there I wouldn’t start from here: A critical commentary on current assessment practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(4), 479–492. doi: 10.1080/02602930903512883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Ranson, S. (2003). Public accountability in the age of neo-liberal governance. Journal of Education Policy, 18(5), 459–480. doi: 10.1080/0268093032000124848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Rauhvargers, A. (2011). Global university rankings and their impact. European University Association. Accessed 12 May 2016.
  124. Rautalin, M., & Alasuutari, P. (2009). The uses of the national PISA results by Finnish officials in central government. Journal of Education Policy, 24(5), 539–556. doi: 10.1080/02680930903131267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Rawolle, S. (2010). Understanding the mediatisation of educational policy as practice. Critical Studies in Education, 51(1), 21–39. doi: 10.1080/17508480903450208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Redden, G., & Low, R. (2012). My school, education, and cultures of rating and ranking. Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, 34(1–2), 35–48. doi: 10.1080/10714413.2012.643737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Reid, I. (2009). The contradictory managerialism of university quality assurance. Journal of Education Policy, 24(5), 575–593. doi: 10.1080/02680930903131242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Rizvi, F., & Lingard, B. (2010). Globalizing education policy. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  129. Robertson, S. L., & Dale, R. (2013). The social justice implications of privatisation in education governance frameworks: A relational account. Oxford Review of Education, 39(4), 426–445. doi: 10.1080/03054985.2013.820465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Rowlands, J. (2012). Accountability, quality assurance and performativity: The changing role of the academic board. Quality in Higher Education, 18(1), 97–110. doi: 10.1080/13538322.2012.663551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. Rubenson, K. (2008). OECD education policies and world hegemony. In R. Mahon & S. McBride (Eds.), The OECD and transnational governance (pp. 242–259). Vancouver: UBC Press.Google Scholar
  132. Rust, C. (2014, November 13). Are UK degree standards comparable? Times Higher Education. Accessed 11 May 2016.
  133. Rust, C., Price, M., & O’Donovan, B. (2003). Improving students’ learning by developing their understanding of assessment criteria and processes. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(2), 147–164. doi: 10.1080/02602930301671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Saarinen, T., & Ursin, J. (2011). Dominant and emerging approaches in the study of higher education policy change. Studies in Higher Education, 37(2), 143–156. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2010.538472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Sadler, D. R. (2007). Perils in the meticulous specification of goals and assessment criteria. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 14(3), 387–392. doi: 10.1080/09695940701592097.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Sadler, D. R. (2008). Are we short-changing our students? The use of preset criteria in assessment. (TLA Interchange, Vol. 3). Edinburgh: Centre for Teaching, Learning and Assessment.Google Scholar
  137. Sadler, D. R. (2009). Indeterminacy in the use of preset criteria for assessment and grading. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(2), 159–179. doi: 10.1080/02602930801956059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Sadler, D. R. (2012). Assuring academic achievement standards: From moderation to calibration. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 20(1), 5–19. doi: 10.1080/0969594X.2012.714742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Sadler, D. R. (2014). The futility of attempting to codify academic achievement standards. Higher Education, 67(3), 273–288. doi: 10.1007/s10734-013-9649-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Santiago, P., Tremblay, K., Basri, E., & Arnal, E. (2008). Tertiary education for the knowledge society: Volume 1. Special features: governance, funding, quality. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  141. Schuelka, M. J. (2012). Excluding students with disabilities from the culture of achievement: The case of the TIMSS, PIRLS, and PISA. Journal of Education Policy, 28(2), 216–230. doi: 10.1080/02680939.2012.708789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Schwartz, S. (2011, January 27). Irreconcilable differences. Times Higher Education. Accessed 11 May 2016.
  143. Schwartzman, S. (2010). The national assessment of courses in Brazil. In D. D. Dill & M. Beerkens (Eds.), Public policy for academic quality: Analyses of innovative policy instruments (pp. 293–312). London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Sellar, S., & Gale, T. (2011). Globalisation and student equity in higher education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 41(1), 1–4. doi: 10.1080/0305764x.2011.549652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. Sellar, S., & Lingard, B. (2013a). Looking East: Shanghai, PISA 2009 and the reconstitution of reference societies in the global education policy field. Comparative Education, 49(4), 464–485. doi: 10.1080/03050068.2013.770943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. Sellar, S., & Lingard, B. (2013b). The OECD and global governance in education. Journal of Education Policy, 28(5), 710–725. doi: 10.1080/02680939.2013.779791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. Shah, M. (2012). Ten years of external quality audit in Australia: Evaluating its effectiveness and success. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(6), 761–772. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2011.572154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. Shahjahan, R. A., & Kezar, A. J. (2013). Beyond the “national container”: Addressing methodological nationalism in higher education research. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 20–29. doi: 10.3102/0013189x12463050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. Shavelson, R. (2010). Measuring college learning responsibly: Accountability in a new era. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  150. Shiroma, E. O. (2014). Networks in action: New actors and practices in education policy in Brazil. Journal of Education Policy, 29(3), 323–348. doi: 10.1080/02680939.2013.831949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Simons, M., Olssen, M., & Peters, M. (2009). Re-reading education policies. In M. Simons, M. Olssen, & M. Peters (Eds.), Re-reading education policies: A handbook studying the policy agenda of the 21st century (pp. 41–102). Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  152. Stack, M. L. (2013). The Times Higher Education ranking product: Visualising excellence through media. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 11(4), 560–582. doi: 10.1080/14767724.2013.856701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. Stewart-Weeks, M. (2006). From control to networks. In H. Colebatch (Ed.), Beyond the policy cycle (pp. 184–202). Sydney: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  154. Stratford, M. (2014, March 03). Ratings strategy with a cost? Inside Higher Ed. Accessed 11 May 2016.
  155. Thompson-Whiteside, S. (2013). Assessing academic standards in Australian higher education. In S. Marginson (Ed.), Tertiary education policy in Australia (pp. 39–48). Melbourne: Centre for the Study of Higher Education.Google Scholar
  156. Torrance, H. (2007). Assessment “as” learning? How the use of explicit learning objectives, assessment criteria and feedback in post-secondary education and training can come to dominate learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 14(3), 281–294. doi: 10.1080/09695940701591867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  157. Torrance, H. (2011). Using assessment to drive the reform of schooling: Time to stop pursuing the chimera? British Journal of Educational Studies, 59(4), 459–485. doi: 10.1080/00071005.2011.620944.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  158. Trounson, A. (2010, November 10). Regulatory briefing for fortunate few. The Australian. Accessed 11 May 2016.
  159. Turner, D. (2014). Neo-liberalism and public goods. In D. Turner & H. Yolcu (Eds.), Neoliberal education reforms: A global analysis (pp. 1–11). Hoboken: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  160. U.S. Department of Education (2006). A test of leadership: Charting the future of U.S. higher education. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  161. Välimaa, J. (2004). Nationalisation, localisation and globalisation in Finnish higher education. Higher Education, 48(1), 27–54. doi: 10.2307/4151529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. Van Roermund, B. (2013). Rules as icons: Wittgenstein’s Paradox and the law. Ratio Juris, 26(4), 538–559. doi: 10.1111/raju.12027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  163. Vidovich, L. (2004). Global-national-local dynamics in policy processes: A case of ‘quality’ policy in higher education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 25(3), 341–354. doi: 10.1080/0142569042000216981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  164. Vidovich, L. (2007). Removing policy from its pedestal: Some theoretical framings and practical possibilities. Educational Review, 59(3), 285–298. doi: 10.1080/00131910701427231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  165. Vidovich, L. (2013). Policy research in higher education: Theories and methods for globalising times? In J. Huisman & M. Tight (Eds.), Theory and method in higher education research (international perspectives on higher education research, volume 9) (pp. 21–39). Bingley: Emerald Insight.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  166. Vidovich, L., & Currie, J. (2011). Governance and trust in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 36(1), 43–56. doi: 10.1080/03075070903469580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  167. Wall, A. F., Hursh, D., & Rodgers, J. W. (2014). Assessment for whom: Repositioning higher education assessment as an ethical and value-focused social practice. Research & Practice in Assessment, 9, 5–17.Google Scholar
  168. Wang, C.-L. (2011). Power/knowledge for educational theory: Stephen Ball and the reception of Foucault. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 45(1), 141–156. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9752.2011.00789.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  169. Webb, P. T. (2011). The evolution of accountability. Journal of Education Policy, 26(6), 735–756. doi: 10.1080/02680939.2011.587539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  170. Weber, M. (1958). The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism (T. Parsons, Trans.). New York: Scribner.Google Scholar
  171. Welsman, S. (2009). Academic achievement standards paper – comments. Australian Universities Quality Agency. Accessed 12 May 2016.
  172. Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical Investigations. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  173. Woodhouse, D. (2010). When will Australians get a proper perspective and a proper standard? Paper presented at the Financial Review Higher Education Conference, Sydney, Australia, June 2010.Google Scholar
  174. Yorke, D. M. (2008). Grading student achievement in higher education: Signals and shortcomings. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  175. Zajda, J. (2014). Globalisation and neo-liberalism as educational policy in Australia. In D. Turner & H. Yolcu (Eds.), Neoliberal education reforms: A global analysis (pp. 164–183). Hoboken: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  176. Zemsky, R. (2011). Accountability in the United States. In B. Stensaker & L. Harvey (Eds.), Accountability in higher education: Global perspectives on trust and power (pp. 157–175). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jon Yorke
    • 1
  • Lesley Vidovich
    • 2
  1. 1.Curtin UniversityBentleyAustralia
  2. 2.The University of Western AustraliaCrawleyAustralia

Personalised recommendations