This paper outlines the preponderant approaches to external quality evaluation, including the purpose, focus, object, rationale, and methods of external evaluations. Accountability, compliance and, in some countries, control are much more frequent rationales for external monitoring than improvement. Research on the impact of quality monitoring is difficult because it is impossible to control all relevant factors to be able to map causal relationships. Arguably, such an endeavour is a positivist device that ignores the complexity and the wider socio-political context of the quality phenomenon. Nonetheless, there is some impact research, which might be characterised as overview studies or close-up studies. These studies reinforce the view that quality is about compliance and accountability and has, in itself, contributed little to any effective transformation of the student learning experience. Where changes to the student experience have taken place, this has arguably been the result of factors other than the external quality monitoring: at best the existence of the latter provides a legitimation for internally-driven innovation. If quality evaluation is to be transformed to make it transforming it is time to reclaim quality evaluation from opportunistic politicians, re-establish trust in higher education and focus attention on internal processes and motivators. Instead of politically acceptable methods, quality evaluation needs to adopt appropriate research methodologies. The paper will conclude by exploring the conditions under which quality evaluation might be transformed.