| Abstract: | In both Britain and France, evaluation has been seen as one element of national strategies to internationalise higher education (HE), with the spread of evaluation indicating policy convergence. However, there are dangers in describing the cross‐national adoption of evaluation as an instance of policy transfer in higher education. This article compares two evaluation agencies, the French Comité National de l’Évaluation des Établissements Publics à caractère scientifique, culturel et professionnel (CNE) and the British Quality Assurance Agency (QAA), which have both been seen as guarantors of the quality of domestic HE, and concomitantly as elements in international HE promotion. It indicates considerable differences in the evaluation reports produced by each agency, and links these to the context in which they were produced: the institutional relationships between each agency, higher education institutions, and the state; and the general context of ‘evaluation’ in each country's public sphere. The article thus challenges analyses which have seen the proliferation of evaluation across national contexts as evidence of ‘policy transfer’ or of ‘homogenisation’. Instead, it shows how differences in an ostensibly similar ‘product’, the ‘quality reports’ produced by each agency, reflect the institutional context of evaluation and its role in public policy writ large. |
