Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##

Saggi

No. 95 (2026)

For a 'theory of change': reflections on the sidelines of the evaluation of initiatives for the Enhancement of Knowledge of Italian Universities

  • Mauro Palumbo
  • Anna Fausta Scardigno
  • Antonio Felice Uricchio
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/Riv2026oa23361
Submitted
luglio 24, 2026
Published
2026-09-21

Abstract

The text critically analyses the evaluation of the Third Mission and Knowledge Valorisation in Italian universities, with a specific focus on the VQR 2020-2024 exercise. The authors highlight differences between ANVUR guidelines and the international scientific literature, emphasizing how terms such as impact and added value are often used ambiguously. To overcome a purely bureaucratic logic, the adoption of a theory of change that promotes institutional learning and reflexivity is proposed. The goal is to transform evaluation from a simple formal compliance into a strategic tool to strengthen the social and civic role of the Universities. A concentric circles model is also suggested to better monitor the effects of interventions on territories and beneficiaries. In summary, the essay promotes a vision of evaluation understood as a transformative process capable of generating a real improvement in the way by which Universities develop their civic and social responsibility.

References

  1. ANVUR (2024). Documento sulle modalità di valutazione dei casi studio Gruppo di Esperti della Valutazione Attività di valorizzazione delle conoscenze (GEV Interdisciplinare), Roma, 31 luglio VQR-2020-2024-Modalita-valutazione-GEV_VdC.pdf
  2. Barbera, F. (2004). Meccanismi sociali. Elementi di sociologia analitica. Bologna: Il Mulino.
  3. Boffo, S., Moscati, R., Rostan, M. (2025). La Terza Missione nell’Università italiana. Politiche e attività in dodici atenei. Milano: Guerini e Associati.
  4. Brambilla, R, Palumbo, M. (2024). Valutare per valorizzare: l’Apprendimento permanente nella Valutazione della Terza Missione Accademica. Epale Journal on Adult Learning and Continuing Education, 14, pp. 26-35, Marzo.
  5. Carrera, L., Castelnuovo, I., Cavaglia, G.M.C., Chimenti, S., De Bortoli, A., Pascuzzi, E., Piazza S., Sardi, M. (2025). Il Public Engagement delle università italiane nella VQR 2015-19. Uno studio di casi. RIV. Rassegna Italiana di Valutazione, XXIX, 92, pp. 123-143.
  6. Celletti, A., Uricchio, A. F, (2025). Valutare per valorizzare e migliorare: l’esperienza della VQR. Quaderni di Sociologia, 95, pp. 67-80.
  7. Chen, H.T. (2005). Theory-Driven Evaluations / Practical Program Evaluation Sage.
  8. Charles, D, Nieth, L., Coenen, L. Cinar, R. (eds.) (2026). Universities, Knowledge and Places. London-New York: Routledge.
  9. Coleman, J. (1990). Foundations of Social Theory, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA; trad. it. Fondamenti di teoria sociale. Bologna: Il Mulino, 2005.
  10. Elster, J. (2007). Explaining Social Behavior: More Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.; trad.it. La spiegazione del comportamento sociale. Bologna: Il Mulino, 2010.
  11. European Commission: Directorate-General for International Partnerships, Evaluation handbook, Publications Office of the European Union. (2024), https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2841/340793, https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/06350947-4d56-11ef-acbc-01aa75ed71a1/language-en
  12. Fetterman, D.M., Kaftarian, S.J., Wandersman, A. (2015). Empowerment evaluation: Knowledge and tools for self-assessment, evaluation capacity building, and accountability. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  13. Fontana, R., Valentini, E. (a cura di) (2020). Conseguenze della valutazione. Idee e pratiche dei docenti universitari nelle scienze sociali. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  14. Goddard, J., Hazelkorn, E., Kempton, L., Vallance, P. (2021). The civic university: The policy and leadership challenges. Cheltenham–Northampton (MA): Edward Elgar.
  15. Hazelkorn, E. (2020). Research evaluation: Global trends and good practice. Paris: OECD Publishing House, E. (1993). Professional Evaluation: Social Impact and Political Consequences, Thousand Oaks, Ca., Sage.
  16. House, E.R., Howe, K.R. (1999). Values in evaluation and social research, Thousand Oaks, Ca., Sage.
  17. Huemann, M., Turner, R. (eds.) (2024). The Handbook of Project Management (6th ed.). London: Routledge.
  18. Leeuw, F.L. (2023). John Mayne and Rules of Thumb for Contribution Analysis: A Comparison with Two Related Approaches. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 37(3), 03–421.
  19. Mayne, J. (2001). Addressing Attribution through Contribution Analysis. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 16(1), pp. 1–24.