The purpose of this study is to analyze the relationship between quality assurance, the traditional a priori approach, and a more recently developed empirical classification of universities, as a means of assessing whether the different classification systems fulfill their original purpose. The study analyzes Chilean university classifications because they have been used in setting up higher education public policies.,The existing classifications of Chilean universities were identified in the literature. Researchers determined categories, criteria and/or indicators used, as well as their main purposes as described by the authors of the classifications. All the criteria and indicators identified were directly related to the quality of academic activities and to the results of the university accreditation processes. The institutional accreditation outcomes and variables were studied using univariate and multivariate statistical analysis.,The a priori approach proved to be consistent with the results of institutional quality assurance, despite of the variability in individual performances. The empirical systems, however, do not show any contribution to the improvement of public policies in higher education. The results clearly show that classifications based on performance do not necessarily ensure improvements in institutional quality.,To the authors’ knowledge, this analysis is the first study of the relationship between university classification and quality assurance. The growing number of proposals for different empirical classifications in Chilean universities is evidence of institutional diversity only. However, the classification designs did not respond to purposes such as public policies improvements and other expected results from these instruments.

中文翻译：

---

质量保证和大学分类：以智利为例

这项研究的目的是分析质量保证，传统的先验方法和较新开发的大学经验分类之间的关系，以评估不同分类系统是否满足其原始目的。该研究分析了智利大学的分类，因为它们已被用于建立高等教育公共政策。在文献中确定了智利大学现有的分类。研究人员确定了分类的作者使用的类别，标准和/或指标，以及它们的主要目的。确定的所有标准和指标都与学术活动的质量和大学认证过程的结果直接相关。使用单变量和多变量统计分析研究了机构认证的结果和变量。尽管个人绩效存在差异，但先验方法被证明与机构质量保证的结果一致。但是，经验系统对改善高等教育的公共政策没有任何贡献。结果清楚地表明，基于绩效的分类并不一定能确保机构质量的提高。据作者所知，该分析是对大学分类与质量保证之间的关系的首次研究。智利大学中针对不同经验类别的提案数量不断增加，这仅是机构多样性的证据。然而，