Design and Application of PIs in Indonesian He: Key Policy Implications

Authors

  • Risa R. Simanjuntak Bina Nusantara University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21512/humaniora.v2i2.3214

Keywords:

PI, research, Indonesia

Abstract

This literary studies focuses in discussing key political implications in the design and application of Performance Indicaators (PIs) in Indonesia include competition and government’s agenda on research in HE. It is found that the competition is mainly addressed by the current practice of Journal Accreditation as giving benchmark for quality in research. This government’s agenda on research has caused some dilemmas in managing education as complex process. Some suggestions are given in answering to these dilemmas. First, PIs should be regarded as products of current situations and demands. Second, application of the design will have to be assisted by the nature of the institution. PIs should also not be considered as absolute indicators for quality but rather as catalyst toward development.

 

 

Author Biography

Risa R. Simanjuntak, Bina Nusantara University

Jurusan Sastra Inggris, Fakultas Humaniora

References

Bush, T. (1995) Management theories for educational change, London: Paul Chapman.

Cave, M., Hanney, S., Henkel, M., & Kogan, M. (1997). The use of performance indicators in higher education: The challenge of the quality movement (3rd ed.). London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Cuenin, S. (1986). International study of the development of performance indicators in higher education. Paris: paper presented at ORCD, IMHE Project, Special Topics Workshop.

Foskett, N., & Lumby, J. (2003) Leading and managing education: International dimensions. London: Sage Publications.

Gray, J. (1995). The quality of schooling: Frameworks for judgement. In A. S. Mayes & B. Moon (Eds.), Teaching and learning in the secondary school. London: Routledge.

Levačić, R. (2000). Linking resource to learning outcomes. In M. Coleman & L. Anderson (Eds.), Managing finance and resources in education. London: Paul Chapman Publisher.

Morey, A. I. (1999). Major trends in impacting faculty roles and rewards: an international perspective. In H. Eggins (Ed.), Globalization and reform in higher education. Berkshire, Maidenhead: OUP.

Neave, G. (1987). Editorial. European Journal of Education 22, 2, 121-122.

Pollitt, C. (1986). Beyond the managerial model: the case for broadening performance assessment in government and the public services. Financial Accountability and Management 2, 3, 155-170.

Quinn, R. E., Faerman, S. R., Thompson, M. P., & McGrath, M. (1996). Becoming a master manager: A competency framework. New York, John Wiley.

Quinn, R. E. (1988). Beyond rational management. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.

Quinn, R. E. (2003). Becoming a master manager. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Sizer, J. (1979). Assessing institutional performance: An overview. International Journal of Institutional Journal of Institutional Management in Higher Education 3, 1, 49-77.

Online References : http://www.dikti.org/p3m/files/akreditasi_jurnal/JurnalTerakreditasi.html

Downloads

Published

2011-10-31

Issue

Section

Articles
Abstract 114  .
PDF downloaded 36  .