230 likes | 431 Views
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS. Some Suggestions for Generic Indicators August 2008. David Bleazard CPUT bleazardd@cput.ac.za. Background. The SA Technology Network (SATN) is developing a set of Performance Indicators for Universities of Technology
E N D
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Some Suggestionsfor Generic Indicators August 2008 David Bleazard CPUT bleazardd@cput.ac.za Generic_Indicators_Aug08_2
Background • The SA Technology Network (SATN) is developing a set of Performance Indicators for Universities of Technology • The PIs should help to distinguish UoTs from other institutions of Higher Education • UoTs will also be measured according to generic Performance Indicators • Examples are provided here of how SATN institutions might measure themselves in relation to such indicators • The generic PIs are based on HEMIS data, extracted using the Peer Data Sharing application • The PDS was developed by IDSC, in conjunction with UJ and the DoE
Groupings • For each indicator, the data is shown first for the Higher Education sector, divided into groups • The UoTs belonging to SATN constitute one group • Mangosuthu Technikon (a UoT) is included under ‘OTHER’ • Unisa and Vista University are excluded • In the second slide for each indicator, the data for the five UoTs in SATN is shown • Benchmarks have been included in a few examples
Caveats • As always, there are some concerns regarding the reliability of the data • Some areas of data are more problematic than others • Regular use of the HEMIS data for comparative purposes should contribute to more reliable data over time • The institutions have not had an opportunityto validate their data, as reflected in the graphs • Some of the indicators may not reflect ‘performance’ as such, but contribute to the profile of the UoT sector