







































Internship Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education


                   Global Journal of Education and Allied  

Research (GJEAR) 
Volume.14, Number 1; January-2023; 

ISSN: 2837-3707 | Impact Factor: 7.80 

https://zapjournals.com/Journals/index.php/gjear  

Published By: Zendo Academic Publishing 

 

 

pg. 10 

A HOLISTIC METHODOLOGY FOR ASSESSING INTERNSHIP LEARNING 

OUTCOMES IN HIGHER EDUCATION 
 

  
1Maya Farid Abi Nassif, 2Elias Karim Müller 

 

Article Info  Abstract 

Keywords:  

Internship Evaluation, 

Comprehensive Assessment, 

Higher Education Institutions, 

Holistic Approach, Comparative 

Analysis 

  

 

 This study introduces a comprehensive approach to evaluating 

internships that transcends the conventional focus on singular aspects, 

aiming to assess the entire internship process. A distinctive feature of 

this research lies in its proposal of aggregating results, thereby reducing 

the impact of personal reflections, beliefs, and experiences of interns 

and supervisors. This approach fosters a more objective and unbiased 

assessment of internships. Furthermore, the study innovatively 

underscores the roles of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs), students, 

and supervisors in the evaluation process. It advocates for a 

comparative analysis between interns' perceptions and supervisors' 

evaluations, achieved through regression analysis of pre- and post-

internship phases. This analytical technique facilitates the identification 

of outcomes, program weaknesses, curriculum gaps, and internship 

objectives, enabling targeted enhancements. The study also integrates 

the internship process with performance metrics encompassing input, 

process, and output indicators, offering a holistic framework for 

evaluation. In conclusion, this research contributes a novel 

methodology that holistically evaluates internships, bridging gaps in 

assessment and providing avenues for comprehensive improvements. 
 

 

1. ORIGINALITY/VALUE  

Evaluation of internships usually focus on one aspect of the internship. This study suggests an evaluation of all 

aspects of an internship throughout its whole process. It also proposes an aggregation of results that minimizes 

the influence of personal reflections, beliefs and experience of both interns and supervisors for a more objective 

and unbiased assessment.    

Another novelty is that this study equally emphasizes on the roles of the HEI/student/supervisor in evaluating the 

internship. It suggests a cross-comparison between the intern’s own perception towards the internship and the 

supervisor’s evaluation. It addresses this gap by calculating the regression between before and after, and it 

compares results between supervisors and students’ evaluations allowing HEI to identify internships’ outcomes, 

                                                      
1 Lebanese German University, Faculty of Public Health, Biomedical Technologies Department, Sahel Alma, Lebanon2 

https://zapjournals.com/Journals/index.php/gjear


Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (1) 
 

pg. 11 

weaknesses/shortages in the program/curricula/internship objectives and to pinpoint problematic topics that 

would require improvement.  

Lastly, it links the internship process to performance measures (of input, process and output indicators) and 

corrective actions, providing a holistic approach to internship evaluation.   

2. INTRODUCTION   

Internship is integral to many undergraduate degree programs that require practical skill application. It prepares 

students prior to their professional experience (Ebner, Soucek, & Selenko, 2021), makes explicit links between 

the practice-based setting and what is taught in the classroom through reflective activities, provides industry 

feedback to identify areas of weakness and strategies for improvement, encourages students to develop critical 

perspectives of work practices and how they can be improved and incorporates reflection to consider personal 

strengths and career aspirations (Jackson, 2017).   

Assessment of students’ performance and evaluation of courses and teaching are critical elements in the teaching 

and learning environments and are central to each higher education institution's mission of preparing students for 

the future (Balla & Boyle, 2006). While a vast knowledge-base exists to inform good practice in assessment of 

student performance in classroom-based courses, the literature on effective practice for internships, however, 

appears to be sparse.   

Internships are a growing presence on the higher education landscape. They have long been a feature of 

professional programs or practical disciplines at the graduate and undergraduate levels and often serve as capstone 

experiences in those programs as well. Internships are often a requirement for certain degrees and tend to be 

facilitated either through the academic program itself or a centralized academic internship center or career service 

on campus. Lately, even in the liberal arts and sciences fields, internships have grown in response to pressure for 

career-ready graduates and as a result of research on effective practices for deep learning.   

The gained importance of internship was paradoxically accompanied by an absence of systematic and clear 

procedures related to its assessment. While quality assurance promotes a greater role to be given to students and 

accountability and advocates a closer and constantly renewed assessment of learning outcomes, evaluating 

internships’ outcome and feedback seem to have been left out of the equation.   

Some researchers have proposed internship assessment methods involving coordination with the industry, self-

evaluation by the students or peer assessment. However, none of these methods actually give a holistic view of 

the internship’s performance in terms of assuring quality and guaranteeing the expected learning outcome 

(Baartman, Gulikers, & Dijkstra, 2013) (El-Mowafy, 2014) (della Volpe, 2017). Thus, the novelty of this work 

resides in the development of a clear methodology to assess the internship learning outcomes based on clearly 

defined input measures, learning objectives, gap identification coupled with corresponding corrective actions.   

While it is easy to demonstrate that internship experiences are pertinent and important to students’ learning, 

assessing those work-placements or experiences can be quite problematic. In fact, unlike other theoretical courses, 

students or trainees are often in diverse settings, away from the university, with little or no direct oversight. 

Assessment in this case has to accommodate a wider range of activities than that of campus-based courses. 

Designing effective assessment practices remains one of the most challenging issues that universities face when 

implementing workintegrated learning. Practicing workplace activities only are not sufficient to ensure effective 

learning. On one hand, the addition of conventional university assessment methods (such as examinations, essays, 

reports) could potentially conflict with the richer and complex learning that often takes place during an internship, 

on another hand, good internship assessment design rests on managing the complexity of including a third 

stakeholder (the internship field) and on having a good partnership between the university and the company 

(Ajjawi, et al., 2020). Ensuring that students’ assessment is complete, authentic and fair brings forth many 

challenges. Therefore, higher education institutions should make sure that their students’ experience and 

competence assessment is adequate on several levels all while not relying on a single assessment method.  

George Miller’s work in assessing competence of clinical skills aptly portrays this complexity when he introduced 

four layers of assessment regarding internships: (1) assessment of knowing, (2) knowing how, (3) showing how 



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (1) 
 

pg. 12 

and (4) doing in a realistic and complex context (Baartman, Gulikers, & Dijkstra, 2013). Developing, 

implementing and evaluating practical knowledge is clearly not straight-forward and requires a careful and critical 

reconsideration of current assessment practices.   

The main purpose of this work is to propose an adequate and relatively simple model for defining pre-requisites 

and input measures, selecting the right training field, assessing students’ skills and learning outcomes during or 

following the internship, and identifying the corrective actions eventually needed while taking into account the 

full complexity of such an evaluation. The model is based on quality assurance principles and demonstrates a 

commitment to continuous improvement of curriculum and learning goals. This work is part of a larger endeavor 

that aims to address assessment and performance measurement issues in higher education for both accreditation 

and internal improvement purposes.   

3. LITERATURE REVIEW ON INTERNSHIP’S ROLE IN HIGHER EDUCATION AND ITS 

EVALUATION   

Internship is defined by Cambridge Dictionary as being “a period of time during which someone works for a 

company or organization in order to get experience of a particular type of work”  

(McIntosh, 2013) and by the Business Dictionary as a “period of supervised training required for qualifying for 

a profession that follows a specified number of academic credits or classroom years” (Friedman, 2012). Whether 

it is called internship, training, placement, professional field experience or work-integrated learning, practical 

hands-on trainings are a crucial component of many higher education undergraduate programs. Initially limited 

to technical and applied disciplines, internships have gained popularity throughout the years as a result of the 

positive outcomes they had on graduates. Today, many undergraduate programs entail practical training as an 

integral part of the curriculum. The weight, duration and requisites of internships may vary from a program to 

another and from a country to another, however, its assessment remains complex and problematic as it involves 

parties and settings external to the university, combined with difficulties to align learning activities with what is 

or can be assessed by the university (Ajjawi, et al., 2020).   

Internship has the potential to incorporate the domains of knowledge, skills, and values. The knowledge 

dimension focuses on understanding factual information, terminology, principles, concepts, and theories, while 

the dimension of skills focuses on what the intern will learn to do. Skills can be physical or intellectual. The 

domain of values focuses on habits, beliefs, and motivations an intern may wish to develop or improve, such as 

being more patient or being less defensive about criticism. Assessing an internship should therefore assess the 

student’s progress in all those areas in a non-subjective manner. An internship can be a powerful vehicle for a 

variety of outcomes with several dimensions of learning and development:  

- Through the professional dimension, an internship is an opportunity to take the next step in career 

readiness, to acquire more of the knowledge, skills, attitudes, and values of a profession or an academic discipline 

and to explore how well those fit with personal interests and strengths. The internship also offers the opportunity 

to understand the world of work in a more complete way and become socialized into the norms and values of a 

profession.   

- The academic dimension emphasizes the applied learning of a particular academic discipline, thereby 

deepening understanding of key disciplinary concepts. There are also important essential abilities across 

disciplines that can be strengthened in an internship, including the ability to look critically at information, think 

creatively, work in a team, perceive issues from multiple viewpoints, develop analytical abilities, and 

communicate clearly both verbally and in writing.   

- The personal dimension is an opportunity for intellectual and emotional development important to a 

student’s life, regardless of occupation. Internship offers an opportunity to develop qualities such as flexibility, 

sensitivity, and openness to diversity. The internship can also be a powerful catalyst for developing a sense of 

potential, testing creative capacities, and exercising judgement. The opportunity to advance self-understanding 

and self-awareness is a crucial dimension and can include clarifying values and understanding reaction patterns, 

cultural profiles, ways of thinking, and styles of communicating.   



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (1) 
 

pg. 13 

- The civic dimension emanates from the need for students to acquire knowledge, skills, attitudes, and 

values that will allow them to function as productive citizens in a democratic society. The internship is a chance 

to learn about the public relevance and social obligations of a profession and about how those obligations are (or 

are not) carried out at the internship site (King & Sweitzer, 2014).  

In their study, Ajjawi et al. identified three key misalignments that led to inauthentic experiences of internship 

assessment: (1) misalignment between assessment activities creating dissonance between current and future 

selves, (2) misalignment between work placement activities and assessment activities, and (3) misalignment 

between the university and workplace roles. Common to these three misalignments is a lack of shared endeavor 

and coordination among the key stakeholders: student, university and industry (Ajjawi, et al., 2020).   

In general, involving both students and workplace (through internship supervisors) in the evaluation process is 

considered the ideal way of assessing the performance of an internship. Indeed, the combination may facilitate 

the principles of quality assessment which include having regular feedback among all parties, utilizing both 

formative and summative assessment pieces, and incorporating critical reflection [23]. There are, however, long-

held concerns for the reliability and validity of such assessments. Evaluations conducted by workplace 

supervisors are largely related to leniency bias, poor rating reliability, lack of engagement, resistance to be directly 

involved in the assessment process, and inappropriate skills to assess accurately (Jackson, 2017). There can also 

be difficulties in incorporating supervisor’s grades into students’ formal grades rendering standardized 

assessment tools problematic. Moreover, while self-evaluation is a type of assessment that should drive 

accountability and self-improvement, basing an assessment solely on students’ self-evaluation is a very sensitive 

and risky method as it assumes that students have the needed training and maturity to perform such a task.   

Therefore, a multi-dimensional approach to internship assessment is essential if we are to overcome those 

challenges, recognize the biases in students’ self-evaluation and supervisors’ evaluation while focusing on 

internship quality and learning outcome.   

4. PLACE OF INTERNSHIP EVALUATION IN QUALITY ASSURANCE AND ACCREDITATION   

One of the multiple definitions of quality assurance in higher education is the systematic management and 

assessment procedures adopted by a higher education institution or system, to monitor performance and to ensure 

achievement of quality outputs or improved quality. Quality assurance aims to give stakeholders confidence about 

the quality of management and of the achieved outcomes.  

Accreditation is defined in Cambridge dictionary as “the fact of being officially recognized, accepted, or approved 

of, or the act of officially recognizing, accepting, or approving of something” (McIntosh, 2013). Webster defines 

the word accredit as the fact “to give official authorization to or approval of something or to consider or recognize 

as outstanding” (Webster, 2017). As for oxford, accreditation is an “official approval given by an organization 

stating that somebody/something has achieved a required standard” (Oxford University Press, 2014). 

Accreditation in higher education refers to a process of assessment and review which enables a higher education 

program or institution to be recognized or certified as meeting appropriate standards.  

Accreditation is performed by accreditation agencies that evaluate the quality of an institution or one of its 

programs based on a set of standards. Agencies can be national covering one country like those operating in 

China, India, or Bangladesh  (Natarajan, 2011) (Song, 2018) (Samal & Bharati, 2019) (Chowdhury, Alam, Kanti 

Biswas, Islam, & Islam, 2013) or international, covering several countries or a continent as it is the case in Europe, 

USA and most of the developed countries  (Teichler, 2018).  

The quality debate in higher education is not a new topic. In the past, higher education institutions and 

governments used different terminology, such as academic standards, standards of degrees and diplomas, student 

assessment, audit and accountability. At that time, the main concerns were largely about maintaining academic 

standards according to some national or international norms, the maintenance and improvement of levels of 

teaching and learning, and ensuring sufficient financial and other resources to achieve the institution’s mission. 

Many of these issues are still important today, but the new quality debate focuses now on achieving quality 

outcomes, assessing the suitability of graduates for the workforce, providing information to stakeholders in order 



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (1) 
 

pg. 14 

to assure them of the quality and credibility of outputs, and establishing appropriate management processes to 

monitor achievement and to monitor the extent to which specified goals and objectives are being met (Meek & 

Harman, 2000). In other words, today’s concerns are more about management processes and their effectiveness, 

the assessment of outputs, outcomes, monitoring performance, and demonstrating how well outputs/outcomes 

meet employers’ and others’ needs.   

This brings us to question the place and role of internship, its process management and its assessment in the midst 

of quality and accreditation efforts. While answering to accountability of graduates’ practical learning outcomes 

and meeting workplace requirements are essential to assuring quality, the translation of this priority into clear 

actions and accreditation standards is still vague. Acknowledging the important role of internship in the learning 

process is one thing. Establishing clear and comprehensive assessment methods is something else.    

Following a quick review of several institutional accreditation agencies like ACE (Accreditation Institution - 

Denmark), EVALAG (Evaluation Agency Baden-Württemberg - Germany),  

ACQUIN  (Accreditation, Certification  and  Quality  Assurance  Institute  - Germany),  

ANECA (Agencia Nacional de la Evaluación de la Calidad y Acreditación - Spain), QAA (Quality Assurance 

Agency for Higher Education – United Kingdom), EduQua (Swiss quality label for further education institutions 

- Switzerland), NEASC (Middle States Commission on Higher Education - USA), and HLC (Higher Learning 

Commission - USA) (Eaton, 2010), it was striking to notice the dearth of standards dedicated to internship 

assessment. In fact, none of the abovementioned agencies proposes a specific method to assess internships’ 

objectives, learning outcomes, or internship’s impact on the student’s academic and professional development.   

Moreover, when scanning the standards of programmatic accreditation agencies such as CTI (Commission des 

Titres d'Ingénieurs - France), ABET (Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology - USA), or AACSB 

(Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business), the only mention about students’ practical work is that 

there should be direct measures to assure learning. In other words, to have evidence from learner’s work such as 

examinations, quizzes, assignments, and internship or externship feedback that is based on direct observation of 

specific performance behaviors or outcomes. Some have mentioned that assessment should lead to curricular and 

process improvement (AACSB, 2020). The German FIBAA (Foundation for International Business 

Administration Accreditation) requires the program to be systematically oriented towards meeting the anticipated 

requirements of the dynamic job market and makes use of the results of graduate evaluations. As for highly 

practical programs with extensive clinical work like Nursing, ACEN (Accreditation Commission for Education 

in Nursing) standards state that student clinical experiences and practice learning environments are evidence-

based, reflect contemporary practice and nationally established patient health and safety goals, and support the 

achievement of the end-of-program student learning outcomes. As much as all this is true and important, yet it 

remains very theoretical. In fact, internship assessment is required by most accreditation standards however, none 

has put forward clear standards and guidance that explicitly elaborates on the performance measure on which 

Institutions can rely for evaluating their activities (whether internship or class teaching) and providing evidence 

of their conformity (Asif & Searcy, 2014).   

Internship evaluation allows us to analyze and assess the matching between the theoretical and laboratory 

knowledge acquired on-campus on one side, and the practical and technical skills required in the workplace on 

the other (Bender, 2021). Closing the gap (between education and industry’s needs) in terms of learning outcomes, 

program’s objectives and content will be gradually reached.  

5. METHODOLOGY   

Several management tools and methods already exist to measure and evaluate quality performance in general; 

check sheet, grids, flowcharts, balanced scorecard, cause and effect diagram, performance indicators, etc. (Cave, 

Hanney, Henkel, & Kogan, 2006). Many higher education institutions have adopted those tools from the industry 

to assess the performance of teaching and research. While we will not delve into the risks and challenges of 

implementing  

http://acedenmark.eu/
http://acedenmark.eu/
http://acedenmark.eu/
http://acedenmark.eu/
http://acedenmark.eu/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_des_Titres_d%27Ing%C3%A9nieur
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_des_Titres_d%27Ing%C3%A9nieur
http://www.abet.org/
http://www.abet.org/
https://www.chea.org/accreditation-commission-education-nursing
https://www.chea.org/accreditation-commission-education-nursing
https://www.chea.org/accreditation-commission-education-nursing
https://www.chea.org/accreditation-commission-education-nursing
https://www.acenursing.org/acen-accreditation-manual-glossary/#ClinicalPracticumLearningExperiences
https://www.acenursing.org/acen-accreditation-manual-glossary/#ClinicalPracticumLearningExperiences
https://www.acenursing.org/acen-accreditation-manual-glossary/#PracticeLearningEnvironments
https://www.acenursing.org/acen-accreditation-manual-glossary/#PracticeLearningEnvironments
https://www.acenursing.org/acen-accreditation-manual-glossary/#EvidenceBased
https://www.acenursing.org/acen-accreditation-manual-glossary/#EvidenceBased
https://www.acenursing.org/acen-accreditation-manual-glossary/#EvidenceBased
https://www.acenursing.org/acen-accreditation-manual-glossary/#EvidenceBased
https://www.acenursing.org/acen-accreditation-manual-glossary/#ContemporaryNursingPractice
https://www.acenursing.org/acen-accreditation-manual-glossary/#ContemporaryNursingPractice
https://www.acenursing.org/acen-accreditation-manual-glossary/#Patient/Client
https://www.acenursing.org/acen-accreditation-manual-glossary/#Patient/Client


Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (1) 
 

pg. 15 

“borrowed” methods from the industry, it is important to mention that none of these tools were specifically 

developed for higher education and even less for assessing the performance of workintegrated learning. The 

performance evaluation method suggested in this paper takes into account the context of higher education in 

general and the particularities of evaluating practical learning.   

We will start by presenting the process of internship before proposing evaluation tools and indicators to assess 

the internship’s performance at each step of the process.    

  
Figure 1. Internship process  

We will start by describing the steps:   

5.1. Pre-Requisites and Inputs  

The first idea in the internship process is to clearly define the objectives and learning outcomes that the student 

and the institution aim to reach upon internship completion. The second is to make sure that all input measures 

are adequate and fulfill the internship’s mission. Typically, internship learning outcome is to develop students’ 

professional identities and capability through the integration of different forms of knowledge and reflection on 

the nature of work. Internship should help students see the relevance of their study, contextualize learning 

outcomes, and promote engagement in learning (Devedzic, et al., 2018). Input measures designate the human, 

financial and physical resources involved in supporting the internship’s purpose. In fact, it is believed that when 

a set of input resources is demonstrated to be available (and in the presence of institutional will), it indicates a 

good chance that current conditions favor the creation of quality education (Manning, 2018).   

5.2. Internship Classification and Selection  

This step allows an efficient classification and selection process of internship venues. It informs about the variety, 

availability and profile of the available internship venues, the expected dedicated assistance and supervision the 

student would receive and the diversity of tasks, size of projects, etc. to which the student would be exposed. 

Students who perform their internship at exceptional institutions will benefit from the experience more likely 

than those who did it in a merely adequate one.   

5.3. Internship Period  

This is the actual period where students are doing their practical work under the supervision of an internship 

supervisor.  

5.4. Gap Identification  

Following the internship period and the assessment of students’ learning outcomes, it is crucial to compare the 

outcomes to the intended objectives set in the first step. When those gaps are identified, measured, interpreted 

and corrected, it allows continuous improvement. Managing the performance of internships is in fact the process 

where actual performance, targets and gaps are reviewed to ensure that timely preventive and corrective actions 

take place.  

5.5. Control Variables and Corrective Actions  

Assessing a performance without taking the right improvement measures or corrective actions is a waste of 

resources. The goal is to detect areas of low performance and improve them by implementing the necessary 



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (1) 
 

pg. 16 

corrective measures when meaningful gaps between the actual internship performance and the desired results are 

identified. Control variables represent the potential list of actions that can or should be realized when the actual 

results do not satisfy the pre-defined objectives.  

As one performance indicator cannot paint a complete picture of an internship’s performance, let alone explain 

the gaps and identify corrective actions, the method proposed in this paper suggests an aggregation of several 

performance measurements that assess an internship throughout its full process allowing to develop an objective, 

quantifiable and holistic judgment in the purpose of continuous improvement.  

The foundation of a successful internship is the alignment between the internship’s intended learning outcomes, 

learning activities and assessment while considering the following criteria:   

o students should engage in reflection on their personal goals and learn how to perform selfassessment;   

o the internship’ learning outcomes are clearly defined and consistent with the program’s learning 

outcomes;   

o prerequisites to the internship are well defined and achieved prior to enrollment;  o alignment between 

the institution’s intended outcomes and the workplace expectations should be done prior to the internship, when 

defining objectives;  

Assessing the internship is therefore a continuous process based on qualitative and quantitative measurements of 

performance, followed by gap identification and corrective actions.  

Performance measures or Performance Indicators (PIs) are qualitative or quantitative measures used to evaluate 

the performance of a company, an activity, a process or an educational program. They are also used to determine 

whether predefined objectives have been met. PIs in higher education are an important measurement tool used to 

assess the performance of the institution, a department, a program or an activity, academically, strategically or 

financially. They can evaluate input measures, processes, outputs or outcomes. Based on their results, the 

institution would have a clear understanding of the present situation, how effectively it is meeting its objectives 

and would be able to set up improvement plans. This practice, whether it is part of an accreditation process or 

self-imposed, is necessary to assure quality and continuous improvement (Roubtsova & Michell , 2013). Several 

methods and techniques exist to define and to calculate PIs. Although it is not the subject of the present paper, a 

quick review of literature regarding performance management and the use of PIs in higher education showed that 

very few authors have addressed the specific context of higher education when proposing this management tool. 

While some measurements have been developed throughout the years to assess research performance, students’ 

graduation, retention rates or even satisfaction, none has attempted to specifically assess students’ internship 

performance. In this paper several quantitative and qualitative PIs are proposed with the purpose of evaluating 

the performance of an internship throughout its whole process. By using PIs aligned with the program’s learning 

objectives, it is possible to evaluate effectiveness and measure the achievement of the internship’s learning 

outcomes quantitatively and qualitatively. This achievement should then be compared to a target, whether a 

previous result, an average of results, a certain threshold (predefined objectives) or if available, a benchmark.  

5.6. Internship’s Evaluation Method  

For each step of the process we will detail the evaluation method and suggest PIs that will help assess and monitor 

the process’ effectiveness. The PIs and their calculation method are detailed in the table at the end of the article.   

1- Pre-requisites and inputs are related to academic pre-requisites that students should acquire prior to their 

enrolment in the internship and to requirements (academic, human and physical) that the higher education 

institution should secure in order to maximize the benefits of internships. The following areas are of particular 

importance:   

 Curriculum and courses’ regular updates. It is important to continuously update the program’s curriculum 

and courses as part of quality and continuous improvement efforts. The update consists in the addition/removal 

of courses, modification of pre- and co-requisites of courses, significant changes in the courses’ objectives and 

content, establishment of minors (subfields), etc. In other terms, it involves taking in account any adjustment or 



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (1) 
 

pg. 17 

enhancement made as a response to an expressed need or corrective action or to the introduction of new 

technologies that affect the program.  Frequency of curriculum and courses updates (PI1 in the table);  

 Qualification of faculty members. The profile of the faculty members teaching and doing research at the 

department (degrees and experience) reflects the added values that they can bring to the department. Those who 

hold professional positions in the industry are able to provide students with many opportunities in terms of job 

placements, participation in industrial projects, real case-studies and most importantly, alignment between 

theoretical knowledge and practice. Faculty members holding a PhD might not bring industry expertise, however, 

they offer deep scientific knowledge and research competence. A high ratio of professional experience indicates 

a high number of faculty members who are involved in the industry, and consequently, higher chances for students 

to acquire practical know-how prior to their internships and consequently more chances to highly perform   

   Qualification of the faculty members (PI2 in the table):   

i. Percentage of full timers and part-timers having a Professorship degree; ii. Percentage of full 

timers and part-timers having a Ph.D. degree; iii. Percentage of full timers and part-timers having 

a Master degree; iv. Percentage of full timers with a professional experience;  

v. Percentage of part timers who presently hold a position in the industry.  

 Student’s GPA and prerequisite courses. This parameter indicates that the prerequisites that students 

should acquire prior to their internship (such as a minimum cumulative GPA, prerequisite major courses or 

minimum earned credits) should be clearly defined and validated before allowing the students to enroll in the 

internship in order to fully benefit from the internship experience (PI9);  

 Program’s relation with the industry. A program that is designed and taught in collaboration with the 

business sector is more likely to produce graduates who possess  

up-to-date and adequate skills to succeed in the job market (PI10);     

 Clear definition of internship learning outcomes. It is probably the most important action. The department 

should have a clear list of skills, attributes and knowledge that students should acquire by the end of their 

internship period, linked to a detailed assessment scheme. The internship’s evaluation (through forms and 

questionnaires) will be based on that assessment scheme. Assessment of learning outcomes guarantees to 

stakeholders that students have reached various knowledge and skills and that they are ready for employment or 

further study (PI11);   

 Societal and professional impact of the program. The impact of the program on its environment can be 

assessed by the extent of its collaboration and engagement with the community through the organization of 

professional development activities. In fact, workshops, conferences, seminars and continuing education 

programs tend to close the gap between higher education and labor market needs that undergraduate curricula 

don’t seem to fully cover. It includes also the program’s participation in presenting findings or innovative 

techniques and methods that are newly being implemented in the industry and not yet integrated in academic 

programs through conferences holdings and experts gathering. Societal impact of the program is also translated 

in the number of joint research projects with the industry (refer to PI3 in the table);  

2- Classification and selection of internship venues is important as it guarantees that students will be 

performing their training in a suitable organization. The proposed indicator allows an efficient selection and 

ventilation process of internship venues   

Internship venue selection criteria (PI4 in the table);  

3- The internship period is the period during which the students are physically based in a professional setting 

for a defined period. In general, internship experience is assessed through questionnaires filled by the students 

themselves or by the internship supervisor. Many forms and concepts of satisfaction questionnaires and 

evaluation sheets are used to assess internships, however, it was concluded that they were subjective and lacked 

accuracy. The study of Baartman et al. is one of many studies that established that the involvement of the work-

field in training assessment is usually weak. As a result, the assessments are less authentic, the work-field does 

not know and understand the assessment criteria, does not accept the assessment, and professionals from the 



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (1) 
 

pg. 18 

work-field are not involved as assessors. Another finding was that the translation of the competences to be 

assessed into assessment criteria understandable by students to be used and actually be assessed in appropriate 

assessment methods is not always available (Baartman, Gulikers, & Dijkstra, 2013). This can result in students’ 

leaning outcome being inappropriately assessed because of the lack of understanding. In our proposal, both the 

students and the supervisors will fill an evaluation form. These same evaluations will be filled at two different 

points in time: before and after the internship for the trainee, after the first week and at the end of the internship 

for the supervisor. Those questionnaires are based on the list of skills and aptitudes determined in the learning 

objectives of the internship in terms of technical, managerial, personal and soft skills (Devedzic, et al., 2018). 

Using two evaluation forms at two different points in time based on learning outcomes minimizes the risks of 

subjectivity and biases.   

At the same time, students’ performance in theoretical courses taken during or after the internship will be 

evaluated and compared to their performance in related courses taken before the internship. This comparison is 

an indirect manner to assess the added value of the internship on success in theoretical courses. An improvement 

of the student’s academic performance following an internship indicates a beneficial and effective internship 

experience.  

Influence of the internship on the student’s performance in theoretical courses (PI5 in the table)  

Questionnaires results (PI7 in the table)  

i. Questionnaire filled by the student and the beginning of the internship  

ii. Questionnaire filled by the supervisor and the beginning of the internship  

iii. Questionnaire filled by the student at the end of the internship  

iv. Questionnaire filled by the supervisor at the end of the internship  

4- Identifying the gaps between the intended learning outcomes and the achieved ones is the most important 

step of the process. As assessing learning outcomes is already an arduous practice that still needs to be done more 

efficiently (Coates, 2015), assessing practical learning in off-campus settings is even more difficult and tricky. 

Therefore, we suggest several indirect indicators that when combined, would give a holistic and more accurate 

picture of the extent of learning outcomes achievement.   

 Students’ employability. This indicator informs about the employability of the graduates in general and 

as a result of a successful internship (recruitment in the same institution where the student performed the 

internship). This adapted employability rate serves as a proxy to assess the level of satisfaction of the internship 

field. The higher the ratio, the higher the degree of satisfaction of the training field and/or the realization of the 

internship’s objectives and/or the higher the whole program outcome.  

   Employability of graduates (PI6 in the table);  

 Achievement of internship’s learning outcomes. This indictor studies the matching between the 

internship’s learning objectives and the actual learning outcome by cross-comparing the four evaluation forms 

filled by the trainee and the internship’s supervisor (as presented in step 3 above).   

  Evaluation of the internship’s learning outcomes as compared to the objectives (PI7 in the table);  

 A general satisfaction questionnaire is distributed to the students and to the internship fields to evaluate 

their contentment in the training regardless of the student’s technical performance. It actually assesses the 

students’ satisfaction with the internship venue in terms of opportunities, follow-up and supervision. The 

supervisor’s satisfaction evaluates the personal competencies of the students and the quality of follow-up 

provided by the higher education institution. Technical and scientific skills are covered in PI7. The satisfaction 

rate and its evolution are to be compared periodically by batches of students and by training field. It enables the 

assessment of the satisfaction level from two different perspectives, and eventually identifies improvement areas 

outside purely academic matters.   

Students’ satisfaction/ Internship’s venue satisfaction (PI8 in the table);  

5- At this level, corrective actions can be launched based on the gaps’ identification from the previous step. 

We suggest the below action means along with their deployment method:  



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (1) 
 

pg. 19 

A1. Appointing a steering committee, consisting of faculty members, experts and partners from the industry, to 

review the courses’ objectives/content and the internship’s objectives and/or assigning a students’ committee 

(currently enrolled students and alumni) to collect their feedback, comments and suggestions;   

A2. Assigning a faculty council to review the number of allocated hours/credits for key courses/laboratory 

work/internship, the pre-requisite courses/GPA needed before starting the internship, etc. and any other academic 

prerequisite deemed meaningful;   

A3. Conducting meetings with the training fields (direct supervisors and directors), in order to describe the 

internship’s objectives, and/or collect additional feedback regarding the students’ behavior and knowledge, 

shortages, and/or come-up with common actions;   

A4. Reviewing the evaluation and assessment methods on theoretical and laboratory courses;  

A5. Organizing targeted workshops and seminars on-campus delivered by industry  

specialists;   

A6. Reviewing the profile of the faculty members and laboratory assistants.  

Table 1. Performance Indicators   

Title of the Performance 

Indicator  

Calculation method  

PI1 Curriculum and courses’ 
frequency of  

updates   

  

The ratio of curriculum and/or courses frequency of update should be 
calculated over several years (for more representativeness).  

 

 ,  

and  

 where n the total 

number of courses in a given curriculum, ng the number of general 

courses, nc the number of core courses and nm the number of major 

courses. Let nug the number of updated general courses, nuc the number 

of updated core courses and num the number of updated major courses.  

PI2 Qualification of faculty 

members   

  

where nPTi and nFTi are, respectively, the number 
of part time and full time instructors of the program and   

- nii is the number of part time and full time instructors having a 

professorship degree for the “Percentage of full timers and part-timers 

having a Professorship degree indicator”;  

- nii is the number of part time and full time instructors having a Ph.D. 

degree for the “Percentage of full timers and parttimers having a Ph.D. 

degree”;  

- nii is the number of part time and full time instructors having a master 

degree for the “Percentage of full timers and parttimers having a Master 

degree”;  

  

where npfi is the number of full time instructors having a professional 

experience;  

 where nppi is the number of part timers time instructors 

holding a position in the industry correlation through 

linear regression.   



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (1) 
 

pg. 20 

Table 2 shows the interconnections between the PIs and the control variables. This summary table is important 

to ensure the coherence between the PI’s (level of performance achieved) and the control variables to identify the 

adequate corrective actions that should be applied upon gap identification. This also ensures that the chosen PI’s 

are not redundant in their usage and that none are missing. Lastly, it serves as a quick reference for the users of 

PIs to facilitate and prompt the process of gap identification and launching of corrective actions.    

Table 2. Interconnection between the PIs and the control variables  

PIs    PI1  PI2  PI3  PI4  PI5  PI6  PI7  PI8  PI9  PI10  PI11  

Controlvariables  

A1  X    X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  

A2          X    X    X      

A3    X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  

A4          X  X  X          

A5  X    X      X  X      X    

A6    X        X  X      X    

To conclude, figure 2 summarizes the overall evaluation methodology throughout the whole internship process 

used as a roadmap for internship assessment.   

  
  

Figure 2. Summary of internship process and assessment  

6. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORKS  

In this paper, eleven PIs were proposed in order to evaluate the performance of an internship throughout its whole 

process and through several angles. We compared the internship’s learning outcomes with its expected objectives, 

studied the influence of the internship on the student’s academic performance, assessed the satisfaction of the 

internship fields and whether it was translated into actual recruitment, studied the profile of the internship fields 

as well as that of the faculty members, and lastly, calculated the frequency of curriculum updates and professional 

development activities. On another hand, six control variables were proposed to be launched as corrective actions 

to close the gaps between expectations and actual performance whenever needed. At a first stage those corrective 

actions aim to continuously improve the internship’s performance, at a second stage, they will help to enhance 

the overall program learning outcomes and their coherence with the labor market requirements. As a future work, 

this scheme should be tested and applied to several academic programs, especially to those where practical work 

holds an important place, in order to verify its validity.   



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (1) 
 

pg. 21 

REFERENCES  

[1] AACSB. (2020). Standard 5: Assurance Of Learning. Taiwan: AACSB Accreditation Taskforce.  

[2] Ajjawi, R., Tai, J., Le Huu Nghia, T., Boud, D., Johnson, L., & Patrick, C.-J. (2020). Aligning assessment 

with the needs of work-integrated learning: the challenges of authentic assessment in a complex context. 

Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 304-316.  

[3] Asif, M., & Searcy, C. (2014). A composite index for measuring performance in higher education 

institutions. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management , 983-1001.  

[4] Baartman, L., Gulikers, J., & Dijkstra, A. (2013). Factors influencing assessment quality in higher vocational 

education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1-20.  

[5] Balla, J., & Boyle, P. (2006). Assessment of Student Performance: a framework for improving practice. 

Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 17-28.  

[6] Bender, D. (2021). Internship assessment in professional program accreditation: a 10-year study. Education 

+ Training, 256-270.  

[7] Cave, M., Hanney, S., Henkel, M., & Kogan, M. (2006). The Use of Performance Indicators in Higher 

Education: The Challenge of the Quality Movement. Pennsylvania: Jessica Kingsley.  

[8] Chowdhury, H., Alam, F., Kanti Biswas, S., Islam, T., & Islam, S. (2013). Quality Assurance and 

Accreditation of Engineering Education in Bangladesh. Procedia Engineering, 56, 864-869.  

[9] Coates, H. (2015). Assessment of Learning Outcomes. In M. L. Curaj A., The European Higher Education 

Area (pp. 399-413). Melbourne: Springer.  

[10] della Volpe, M. (2017). Assessment of internship effectiveness in South Italy Universities. Education + 

Training, 797-810.  

[11] Devedzic, V., Tomic, B., Jovanovic, J., Kelly, M., Milikic, N., Dimitrijevic, S., . . . Sevarac , Z. (2018). 

Metrics for Students’ Soft Skills. Applied Measurement in Education, 31(4), 283-296.  

[12] Eaton, J. (2010). The Role of Accreditation of Higher Education Institutions. In International Encyclopedia 

of Education (pp. 384-389). Elsevier Science: Amsterdam.  

[13] Ebner, K., Soucek, R., & Selenko, E. (2021). Perceived quality of internships and employability perceptions: 

the mediating role of career-entry worries. Education + Training, 579-596.  

[14] El-Mowafy, A. (2014). Using peer assessment of fieldwork to enhance students’ practical training. 

Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 223-241.  

[15] Friedman, J. (2012). Dictionary of Business and Economics Terms. New York: Barrons Educational Series.  

[16] Jackson, D. (2017). Challenges and strategies for assessing student workplace performance during work-

integrated learning. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 555-570.  

[17] King, M., & Sweitzer, H. (2014). Towards a Pedagogy of Internships. Journal of Applied Learning in Higher 

Education, 6, 37-59.  



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (1) 
 

pg. 22 

[18] Manning, S. (2018). Quality Assurance and Quality Improvement: Why and How Accreditation Works. In 

K. K. Susan Phillips, Accreditation on the Edge (pp. 13-30). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.  

[19] McIntosh, C. (2013). Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary. England: Cambridge University Press.  

[20] Meek, V. L., & Harman, G. (2000). Repositioning Quality Assurance and Accreditation in Australian Higher 

Education. Canberra: Evaluations and Investigations Programme of the Department of Employment, 

Education, Training and Youth Affairs - Australia.  

[21] Natarajan, R. (2011). The origins and history of accreditation of technical education programs in India. 

International Workshop on Institutional and Programme Accreditation: Connections and Opportunities. 

Bangalore, India.  

[22] Oxford University Press. (2014). Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary. England: Oxford University Press.  

[23] Roubtsova , E., & Michell , V. (2013). KPIs and Their Properties Defined with the EXTREME Method. In 

Business Modeling and Software Design. Cham: Springer.  

[24] Samal, S., & Bharati, A. (2019). Gaps in engineering education with a categorical analysis on 

nanotechnology in India. Materials today Proceedings, 10, 121-135.  

[25] Song, D. (2018). Comparison of CDIO and Chinese Engineering Education Accreditation for Animation 

Specialty of TUST. Procedia Computer Science, 131, 765-770.  

[26] Teichler, U. (2018). Recent changes of financing higher education in Germany and their intended and 

unintended consequences. International Journal of Educational Development, 158, 37-46.  

[27] Urquìa-Grande, E., & Pérez Estébanez, R. (2021). Bridging the gaps between higher education and the 

business world: internships in a faculty of economics and business. Education + Training, 490509.  

[28] Webster, M. (2017). Merriam-Webster's Advanced Learner's English Dictionary. Massachusetts: Merriam-

Webster, Inc.  

  


