Il mandato valutativo e il disegno organizzativo: il caso dell’ANVUR

Titolo Rivista RIV Rassegna Italiana di Valutazione
Autori/Curatori Brigida Blasi
Anno di pubblicazione 2022 Fascicolo 2021/80-81
Lingua Italiano Numero pagine 21 P. 208-228 Dimensione file 281 KB
DOI 10.3280/RIV2021-080011
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più clicca qui

Qui sotto puoi vedere in anteprima la prima pagina di questo articolo.

Se questo articolo ti interessa, lo puoi acquistare (e scaricare in formato pdf) seguendo le facili indicazioni per acquistare il download credit. Acquista Download Credits per scaricare questo Articolo in formato PDF

Anteprima articolo

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA)associazione indipendente e non profit per facilitare (attraverso i servizi tecnologici implementati da CrossRef.org) l’accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche

  1. AA.VV. (2017), Dopo la riforma: università italiana, università europea? Proposte per il miglioramento del sistema terziario, Quaderno n. 13 della Associazione TreeLLLe, -- http://www.astrid-online.it/static/upload/1fda/1fda98d757eccf98ac3137a0eee8fa5d.pdf
  2. Abelhauser A., Gori R., Sauret M. J. (2011), La folie évaluation. Paris: Mille et une nuits
  3. Abramo G., D’Angelo C.A. and Caprasecca A. (2009), Gender differences in research productivity: a bibliometric analysis of the Italian academic system. Scientometrics,79, 517–539
  4. Amaral A., Meek V. L., Larsen I. M. (eds.) (2003), The higher education managerial revolution? Dordrecht: Kluwer
  5. Amaral A., Rosa M. J. (2010), “Recent Trends in Quality Assurance”, Quality in Higher Education, 16(1): 59-61
  6. ANVUR (2016), “Assicurazione di qualità nell’istruzione superiore”. Rapporto sullo stato del Sistema Universitario e della Ricerca 2016: 215-233
  7. ANVUR (2018), ENQA Self-Assessment Report, available at -- http://www.anvur.it/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/SAR-20_9_2018.pdf
  8. Bleiklie I. (1998), “Justifying the Evaluative State: New Public Management Ideals in Higher Education”, Journal of Public Affairs Education, 4(2)
  9. Bonaccorsi A. (2015), La valutazione possibile. Teoria e pratica nel mondo della ricerca. Bologna: il Mulino
  10. Bonaccorsi A. (2020a), “Two Decades of Experience in Research Assessment in Italy”, Scholarly Assessment Reports, 2(1): 16.
  11. Bonaccorsi A. (2020b), “Two Decades of Research Assessment in Italy. Addressing the Criticisms”, Scholarly Assessment Reports, 2(1): 17
  12. Butera F. (2004), Il castello e la rete: Impresa, Organizzazione e Professioni nell’Europa degli anni ’90, Milano: FrancoAngeli
  13. Capano G. (2014), “The re-regulation of the Italian university system through quality assurance. A mechanistic perspective”, Policy and Society, 33(3): 199-213
  14. Chelimsky E. (1997), “The coming transformations in evaluation”. In E. Chelimsky & W. Shadish (eds.), Evaluation for the 21th Century. Thousand Oaks: Sage
  15. Cerych L., Sabatier P. (1986), Great Expectations and Mixed Performances. The Implementation of Higher Education Reforms in Europe, Trentham: Tentham Books
  16. Clark B. (1983), The higher education system. Academic organization in crossnational perspective. Berkeley: University of California Press
  17. Corte dei Conti (2020), Determinazione e relazione sul risultato del controllo eseguito sulla gestione finanziaria dell’Agenzia Nazionale di Valutazione del Sistema Universitario e della Ricerca (ANVUR), 2017-2018, -- https://www.senato.it/service/PDF/PDFServer/DF/358662.pdf
  18. Crozier M. (1963), Le Phenomene bureaucratique, Paris: Edition du Seuil
  19. Dill D.D. (1997). “Higher education markets and public policy”, Higher Education Policy, 10: l67–85
  20. Donina D., Meoli M., and Paleari S. (2013), “Higher Education Reform in Italy: Tightening Regulation Instead of Steering at a Distance”, Higher Education Policy, 28: 215-234
  21. Dobbins M., Knill C., and Vögtle E. M. (2011), An analytical framework for the cross-country comparison of higher education governance, Higher Education, 62(5): 665–683
  22. ENQA (2019), ENQA Agency Review: Italian National Agency For The Evaluation Of Universities And Research Institutes (ANVUR), -- https://www.anvur.it/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/ANVUR-external-review-report.pdf
  23. Etzkowitz H. (2004), Anatomy of the entrepreneurial university. Social Science Information, 52 (3): 486-511
  24. Etzkowitz,H., Leydesdorff, L.(1997), Universities and the Global Knowledge Economy: A Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations, Andover: Thomson Learning
  25. Fassari L., Valentini E. (eds.) (2019), I sociologi e la valutazione dell’università, Roma: Carocci
  26. Ferlie E., Musselin, C., Andresani, G. (2008), The Steering of Higher Education Systems: A Public Management Perspective. Higher Education, 56(3), 325-348
  27. Franceschet M., Costantini A. (2011), The first Italian research assessment exercise: A bibliometric perspective. Journal of Informetrics, 5, 275–291
  28. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994), The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. Sage Publications
  29. Gouldner A. W. (1954), “Patterns of industrial bureaucracy”, New York, NY, US: Free Press.
  30. Hood C. C. (1991), “A Public Management for All Seasons?”, Public Administration, n. 69, p. 3-19
  31. Kickert, W. (1995), “Steering at a distance: a new paradigm of public governance in Dutch higher education’ Governance”, An International Journal of Policy and Administration, 6(1), 135–157
  32. Lipsky, M. (1980), Street-Level Bureaucracy. Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation
  33. Matarazzo F. (2018), “Il percorso politico e parlamentare della valutazione nelle università. Una storia lunga quarant’anni” in AA. VV. La valutazione del sistema universitario e della ricerca. Una riflessione critica per proporre un nuovo modello, Quaderni Articolo 33, 3: 17-48, Roma: Edizioni Conoscenza
  34. Merton R. K. (1940), “Bureaucratic Structure and Personality”, Social Forces, 18(4): 560–568
  35. Merton, R. K. (1968), Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: The Free Press
  36. Mintzberg H. (1979), The Structuring of Organizations, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall
  37. Morcellini M., Vittorio N. (2007), Il Cantiere aperto della Didattica. Una strategia di innovazione oltre le riforme, Casa Editrice Pensa Multimedia
  38. Neave G. (1986), “On shifting sands: Changing priorities and perspectives in European higher education from 1984 to 1986”, European Journal of Education 21(1), 7–24
  39. Neave, G. (2012), The evaluative state, institutional autonomy and re-engineering higher education in Western Europe: The prince and his pleasure. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan
  40. Neave G. and van Vught F.A. (eds.) (1991), Prometheus Bound. The Changing Relationship Between Government and Higher Education in Europe, Oxford: Pergamon
  41. Neave G. and van Vught F.A. (eds.) (1994), Government and higher education relationships across three continents. Winds of change. Oxford: Pergamon
  42. Nowotny, H. Scott, P., Gibbons, M. (2001), Re-Thinking Science. Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity Press
  43. Olsen J. P. (2007), “The institutional dynamics of the European university”. In University dynamics and European integration (eds.). Johan P. Olsen and Peter Maassen. Dordrecht: Springer
  44. Palumbo, M. (2018), Buone intenzioni e cattive conseguenze. in AA. VV. La valutazione del sistema universitario e della ricerca. Una riflessione critica per proporre un nuovo modello, Quaderni Articolo 33, 3: 49-64, Roma:Edizioni Conoscenza
  45. Palumbo M., Pennisi C. (2014), “La valutazione senza governo”, Rassegna Italiana di Valutazione, (18)59: 7-33.
  46. Parsons T. (1947), "Introduction" in Weber, Theory of Social and Economic Organizations. Glencoe: Free Press
  47. Patton M. Q. (1997), Utilization-focused evaluation: The new century text. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. (Perla, 2019)
  48. Pinto V. (2012), Valutare per punire. Napoli: Cronopio
  49. Polanyi M. (1962), “The Republic of Science and its Political and Economic Theory”, Minerva, 1(1): 54-73
  50. Pollitt C., Bouckaert G. (2000), Public Management Reform. A Comparative Analysis, Oxford: Oxford University Press
  51. Portaluri G. (2016), “Il principio d’imparzialità e i modelli organizzativi. Le autorità amministrative indipendenti”, in L’organizzazione delle pubbliche amministrazioni tra Stato nazionale e integrazione europea. Vol. 1. Firenze: Firenze University Press
  52. Rauhvargers, A., Deane, C., & Pauwels, W. (2009), Bologna Process Stocktaking Report 2009. Report from working groups appointed by the Bologna Follow-up Group to the Ministerial Conference in Leuven/Louvain-la-Neuve
  53. Reale E. (2008), “La valutazione della ricerca pubblica: una analisi della valutazione triennale della ricerca”, Milano, FrancoAngeli
  54. Reale E., Primeri E. (2014). Reforming universities in Italy: Towards a new paradigm. In C. Musselin & P. Teixeira (Eds.), Reforming higher education. Dordrecht: Springer
  55. Rebora G., Turri M. (2011), “Critical factors in the use of evaluation in Italian Universities”, Higher Education 61(5): 531–544
  56. Ribolzi L. (2012), “Come valutare la qualità della ricerca e dell’istruzione”, in G. Vittadini (a cura di), L’università possibile. Note a margine della Riforma, Guerini e associati, Milano, pp. 83-90
  57. Rossi P., Freeman H., and Lipsey, M. (1999), Evaluation: A systematic approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications
  58. Selznick P. (1949), TVA and the grass roots; a study in the sociology of formal organization. Berkeley, CA: Univ. of California Press
  59. Slaughter S., Leslie L.L. (1997), Academic Capitalism: Politics, Policies and the Entrepreneurial University, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press
  60. Stame N. (eds.) (2007), Classici della valutazione, Milano: F. Angeli
  61. Trow M. (1996), “Trust, Markets and Accountability in Higher Education: A Comparative Perspective”, Higher Education Policy, 9(4): 309-324
  62. Turri M. (2014), “The new Italian agency for the evaluation of the university system (ANVUR): a need for governance or legitimacy?”, Quality in Higher Education, 20:1, 64-82
  63. Van der Meulen B. (1998), “Science Policies as Principal–Agent Games: Institutionalization and Path Dependency in the Relation between Government and Science”, Research Policy 27(4):397-414
  64. Weber, M. (1978), Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press
  65. Weick K. E. (1976), “Educational Organizations as Loosely Coupled Systems”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 1976, pp. 1-19
  66. Wilensky H. L. (1967), Organizational intelligence. New York, Basic Books
  67. Uricchio A. F. (2022), “Autonomia universitaria e valutazione”, Osservatorio Costituzionale, 2: 1-18, Convegno di studi dell’Associazione Italiana dei Costituzionalisti “L’autonomia universitaria”, Roma, 28 ottobre 2021
  68. Ziman J. (2001), Real Science: What It Is and What It Means. Cambridge University Press.

Brigida Blasi, Il mandato valutativo e il disegno organizzativo: il caso dell’ANVUR in "RIV Rassegna Italiana di Valutazione" 80-81/2021, pp 208-228, DOI: 10.3280/RIV2021-080011