Dr Cecile Hoareau-McGrath Rand Europe25th of January 2016

Presentation of GAIHE and its motivation

1. Introduction

RAND

Project’s main questionHow can we support innovation in universities?And what can we learn from the example of our

colleagues in other European countries?

Who we are. Our project consortium

1. Introduction

• Most respondents think that higher education is likely to be different over the coming 10 years.

• Most respondents think that their HEI requires significant changes over the next five years.

• Respondents are divided about whether the pace of change affecting their HEI is too slow

Rethinking universities

Question topic: Perceptions of change and innovation in higher education, N = 32

RAND

HE is likely to be different in 10 years

My HEI requires significant changes in 5 years

The pace of change affecting my HEI is too slow

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

27

22

16

5

10

15

Disagree Agree

2. Conceptual framework

Source: GAIHE final report

Inn ovations in education provision

Governance, management,

organisational structure

Curriculum delivery

Programme organisation

IT enriched learning environment

Management of HEIs

HRM functions and employee relations

Other contributors to innovation

Governance structures and principles

Dimensions covered by the project

RAND

3. How innovation is supported

Source: GAIHE final report

,

Management

Employee relations

Other contributors to innovation

Governance

RAND

Rector (30), Q1

Senior leadership (30), Q1

Emphasis on sharing information and knowledge (24), Q2

New technologies (30), Q3

Survey Questions Q1: Who is responsible for leading innovation in education provision at your HEI, and to what degree are they responsible?, ‘responsible for leading in a relatively more significant way/responsible in a very significant way’Q2: Have the innovations in education provision (teaching & learning) led to any changes in the working conditions or expectations of academic staff of your HEI?, N = 27, no change N=25, strengthened cooperation with librarians N=26. Q3: To what extent did the following factors facilitate and support innovation in educational provision at your HEI?, ‘Regularly but not always ‘ N=32, changes in governance structure N=31.

4. Conclusion

Question: Perceptions of change and innovation in higher education, ‘agree to strongly agree’ N = 32

A puzzling perception of innovation in European higher education

• While a majority respondents agrees that European higher education is one of the most innovative in the world, a similar proportion does not think their institution is one of the most innovative.

• Are we too self-deprecating , simply that innovation is spread across ‘averages’, or do European institutions need adjustments and support?

RAND

My HEI is one of the most innovative in Europe

European HE is one of the most innovative in the world

10

20

22

12

agree disagree

4. Conclusion

European research and Reflections about Innovation in France (Monday PM)

Leadership and innovation: what local governance? (Tuesday AM)

How to ensure quality, ethics and sustain innovative practices (Wednesday AM)

Concrete innovations in European higher education (Tuesday PM)

Agenda of the peer learning activity

RAND

RAND

References• European Commission (2016) ‘Open education scoreboard’,

Open education Europa: http://openeducationeuropa.eu/en/european_scoreboard_moocs

• GAIHE Project website: http://www.he-governance-of-innovation.esen.education.fr/

• Gibson, B., Colfer, A. and Hazelkorn, E. (2014) ‘Report on the survey of governance and adaptation to innovative modes of higher education provision’, Dublin: HEPRU DIT.

• RAND Europe project page: http://www.rand.org/randeurope/research/projects/innovation-in-higher-education.html

RAND EuropeWestbrook Centre

Milton RoadCambridge CB4 1YG

United Kingdom

RAND EuropeRue de la Loi, 82

1040 BrusselsBelgium

Contact: cmcgrath@rand.org

www.rand.org www.randeurope.org