The extent to which the recommendations issued after the periodic evaluation of university programs are targeted, specific, measurable and unequivocal: An exploratory analysis

Abstract

Background and study objectivesEach year, Quebec universities conduct a periodic evaluation of their study programs and issue recommendations to improve the quality and relevance of these latter. Although these evaluations are commonplace in higher education institutions, there is little information about them and the resulting recommendations. To compensate this lack of convincing data, our exploratory analysis will look at the quality of expression of these recommendations. MethodologyExperts were solicited to evaluate whether the recommendations were targeted, specific, measurable and unequivocal, four strategic characteristics of good formulations. ResultsOur results reveal major issues. Almost all of the recommendations do not indicate who is to carry them out. Also, the desired improvement is not clearly identified, thus leaving unanswered major questions about how they should be implemented. Another weak point was the absence of indicators for measuring the accomplishment of the recommendations. The last part of this study presents the best practices for issuing better recommendations, since these latter are key in the improvement process and the development of action plans. This study opens the way for research that will examine the root causes of the problem and make it possible to establish best practices for writing recommendations.