Peer review in institutional evaluation procedures “Sharing thoughts and comments about implementation“ Bruno Curvale Evaluation coordinator, CNÉ, France Graz, May 11/12

Presentation outline Introduction The CNÉ (Comité national d’évaluation) –Organisation, role and goals, … Why peer review? –Rationales, perspectives, … Implementation at CNÉ –Practical difficulties, remediation, … Last words

Introduction Prevalence of peer review –A real European diversity –Academics vs technocrats? External quality control –Quality assessments –Quality audits of QA mechanisms –Quality of results –The acting role of transparency Supporting internal quality development

The CNÉ Origin Goals and role Organisation Procedures –Self-evaluation, external evaluation, public report, follow-up Future developments –Building a link between institutional evaluation and programmes evaluation

Why using peer review? A political choice (rather than a technical one) Linked to a vision of HE (ethical dimension) Advantages Limits The peer and the expert

Implementation at CNÉ What is a peer? Training OR issues building The individuals and the team Quality assurance mechanisms –Procedures Contract Guide Mission description –Committee and permanent staff roles’

Last words Peer review: – a necessary condition – needs a robust support methodology The whole evaluation procedure must be transparent and open to criticism