[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-595342-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-595342-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","characteristics-of-quality-assessment-in-different-national-systems-market-simulated-market-and-non-competitive-approaches-paper","Characteristics of quality assessment in different national systems: Market, simulated market and non-competitive approaches - Paper","","The text analyzes how research quality assessment approaches and their reliance on peer review and performance indicators vary across national higher education systems. It contrasts Australia, the USA, and Britain by linking assessment differences to each country’s institutional characteristics and political-social context. It explains market-based competition and shared quality assurance responsibilities in the USA, and simulated-market governance in Britain and Australia. It also distinguishes subject-level evaluations from institutional-level quality audits.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/characteristics-of-quality-assessment-in-different-national-systems-market-simulated-market-and-non-competitive-approaches-paper/595342/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/characteristics-of-quality-assessment-in-different-national-systems-market-simulated-market-and-non-competitive-approaches-paper/595342.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Blitz","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-05","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",6,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"How do research quality assessment approaches differ across national contexts?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"They vary distinctly between countries according to the characteristics of national higher education systems and the broader political and social environments surrounding them.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"What role does market-based competition play in the USA’s higher education quality assurance?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"The text presents the USA as a prime market-based case, where competition is driven largely by institutional reputation and features, and responsibility for quality assurance is shared across multiple independent organizations.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"How are assessment responsibilities divided in Britain compared with institutional-level quality audits?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"In Britain, subject-level evaluations are conducted by Higher Education Funding Councils under government responsibility, while institutional-level quality audits are conducted by the Higher Education Quality Council; the two systems are not fully integrated.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},595342,1793154591,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,105,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":30,"language":139,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":143,"read_time":111,"preview_page_count":4},24464137899374,"https://us-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_3d24733baf745e90a7e4bdd5f77d97b2","Approaches to assessing research quality,and their respectivereliance on peer review and performance indicators,vary distinctlybetween different national contexts.Such differences of approachare related to differences in the characteristics of the national highereducation systems with which they are associated,and to the broaderpolitical and social environments within which those systems areembedded.In Australia,with the advent in 1993 of the Committeefor Quality Assurance in Higher Education,the assessment ofresearch quality has been integrated,at the institutional level,withthe assessnent of higher education quality as a whole.The Austral-ian approach to higher education quality assessment represented bythe Committee for Quality Assurance manifests,on one hand,somedistinctly different characteristics from the current British ap-proach,while on the other,the Australian and British approachesshare some strong similarities which distinguish them from otherOECD countries and from the USA.International comparisons areinformative in enabling an appreciation of the distinctive features ofour own national systen,and providing a basis for reflecting uponthe implications of those features.  \n# Characteristics of quality assessment in differentnational systems:Market,simulated market andnon-competitive approaches\n\nOne of the characteristic differences in higher education systensin various national contexts is the extent to which they are basedupon market relationships.A prime example of market-based highereducation is that of the USA.The dominance of thc market inAmerican higher education was given a boost in 1972 by a decisionto the money in the hands of students so that institutions would haveto compete for students.The main role of Federal govcrnment inhigher education is to provide financial assistancc to students toremove financial barriers,enhancing equality of opportunity.De-spite this,the basis for the competition for students has tended to bereputation,appearances and original features,rather than thequalityof the student experience.!This demonstrates that although markctcontrol is probably more pronounced in the USA,it is by no meansoperating perfectly.In this system responsibility for quality assur-ance is shared by a variety of organisations which have evolvedindependently,operating at a variety of levels and commandingvarying degrees of respect from institutions on the one hand andpolicy-nakers on the other.The situation,according to Marchese,isvery dynanic.For instance,institutional level accreditation,whichwas one of the earlicr forms of quality assurance and has existed fordecades,was under review in late January 1994,with a real possibil-ity of its being replaced by some other form.  \nBy contrast with the USA,in Britain and Australia,a much moreconspicuous role is played by central government.In both countriesgovenment plays a significant role in contriving simulated marketconditions for its higher education system,actively promotingcompetition between institutions in their simulated market.It isassumed that competition between institutions (inter alia)willserve  \nResearch quality,peer review andperformance indicators  \nPenelepe S.Murphy  \nUniversity ofWoMong0ng  \nto enhance standards.Competition between institutions focusesattention upon the institution's role in the management of itsactivities,as distinct from the role of organisational units or indi-viduals within the institution.Government intervention in promot-ing and emphasising institutional responsibility for management hasgiven rise to a perception amongst some academic staff of a growingtendency towards 'managerialism'in universities(Marginson 1993).  \n# Approaches to research assessment vary ininternational context\n\nIn Britain the emphasis on inter-institutional competitiveness isreflected in the changed funding arrangements introduced by theFurther and Higher Education Act of 1992,as well as a series ofotherchanges introduced in the 1990s.There is,however,","cbCaimMVNgAP8gds","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaimMVNgAP8gds","pdf",296844,"English","# Characteristics of quality assessment in different national systems: Market, simulated market and non-competitive approaches\n## Research quality, peer review and performance indicators\n# Approaches to research assessment vary in international context\n## UK: funding changes and split assurance responsibilities\n## Australia: white paper policies and performance indicator development","[{\"question\":\"How do research quality assessment approaches differ across national contexts?\",\"answer\":\"They vary distinctly between countries according to the characteristics of national higher education systems and the broader political and social environments surrounding them.\"},{\"question\":\"What role does market-based competition play in the USA’s higher education quality assurance?\",\"answer\":\"The text presents the USA as a prime market-based case, where competition is driven largely by institutional reputation and features, and responsibility for quality assurance is shared across multiple independent organizations.\"},{\"question\":\"How are assessment responsibilities divided in Britain compared with institutional-level quality audits?\",\"answer\":\"In Britain, subject-level evaluations are conducted by Higher Education Funding Councils under government responsibility, while institutional-level quality audits are conducted by the Higher Education Quality Council; the two systems are not fully integrated.\"}]","Characteristics of quality assessment in different national systems: Market, simulated market and non-competitive approaches - Paper | PDF",1792080950]