Search

Argues that quality in faculty research does not translate directly into quality in teaching, and industrial modes of quality-assurance involving strong central management control are inappropriate for universities. The link between research and teaching is in mechanisms supporting quality. Academics know how to support quality in research; the university must adopt parallel supports for good teaching, especially rewards. (Author/MSE)

The authors comment on Y. Taylor's discussion about analysing data while working on the Victoria Climbié Data Corpus Project. It cites the reasons why the authors were both pleased and somewhat perturbed to read Taylor's discussion. They claim that Taylor's reference to work using the VCDC is dated or missing. In their view, it is a gross misrepresentation of the process of qualitative analysis to see interpretative coding as the only valid way to approach data analysis.

Mechanisms which underlie quality in research have exact parallels which show us how to improve the quality of teaching, learning and assessment. These mechanisms operate in two main ways-within institutions, and across institutions through disciplines. Geography should exploit Funding Council initiatives to build a scholarly community of teachers which matches its community of researchers. This paper suggests a possible focus of attention for attempts to improve assessment through emphasising assessment functions other than those concerned with standards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]