Implementing Benchmarks and Performance Indicators for evaluating University International...
-
date post
19-Dec-2015 -
Category
Documents
-
view
227 -
download
1
Transcript of Implementing Benchmarks and Performance Indicators for evaluating University International...
Implementing Benchmarks and Performance Indicators for
evaluating University International Collaboration
Funded by the Accompanying Measures Programme
Contract No: 2004-4606/001-001 S02 81 AWC
Project Acronym: BEPIQUA
Need for an Action Plan?
• Lisbon Strategy• European Research Area: ERA• European Higher Education Area: EHEA• Bologna Process
Quality Assurance key driver of Bologna and
Lisbon strategy
Quality of the Educational System key underpinning factor of goals for a knowledge-based society
Global Attractiveness of European HE system
• Need to enhance attractiveness of European educational (teaching and research) system
• Internationalisation IS NOT ONLY Mobility
• Need to ascertain means of “institutional comparability” in performance
International Collaboration a KEY driver
Establish a QA System
QA system for international collaborationWhat does international collaboration entail?From the BEPIQUA Survey:• Mobility (students and staff)• Bologna Process (ECTS/DS, EQF, Joint
Degrees etc)• Externally funded programmes (research and
others)• Effective participation in ERA & EHEA• National & Institutional IR activities
Present situation of use of QA
Survey ascertained:• Majority of Universities sampled (90%+)
had no established QA system• Majority of those who had, IR was not
included• However, “Quality Consciousness” existed• A lot of the basic data and infrastructure
exists• “Quality Culture” exists
Is the time right for a QA System?
ALL the prerequisites for establishing a QA system exist:
• International environment
• Institutional will (political and human)
• Availability of basic factors
(IT infrastructure, human dexterities, primary data)
Common methodology and approach (1)
Need to establish Benchmarks (B) and Performance Indicators (PI´s)
Benchmark: level of achievement set for a
particular activity
Performance Indicator: sets Rate/Quality of work needed to achieve benchmark target
Examples of B & PI´s
Student mobility Benchmark (B): To achieve 250 outgoing students by 2010
Performance Indicator (PI): To achieve an increase of 30 outgoing students /year
B=250 students (target)
PI=30 studs/year
100 students
2005 2010
Common methodology and approach (2)
Need to establish a set of B&PI´s in order to cover all the areas of International Collaboration:
• Mobility: incoming-outgoing: students/staff• Bologna process: 3-cycle system, ECTS/DS,
recognition procedures etc• Externally funded projects: Total project number
& value, incoming funds, co-funding, geographic coverage of partners, No. of projects coordinated, No. of patents, products, jobs etc
Common methodology and approach (3)
• Contribution to national goals: No. of bilateral projects, agreements, partners, spin off companies, countries etc
• Contribution to institutional goals: No of transnational projects, partners, developing & third country projects, geographic coverage etc
EXAMPLE: EXTERNALLY FUNDED PROJECTS (1)
Effective Participation in the Integrated Programme on LLL Fictitious Example
** Actual external funding * Co-funding in kind and cash AM/PD (Programmes: Integrated Programme)
Programme No. of Projects
No. of Partners
As Coordinator
As Partner
Total Project Funding
(A)
Funds for ** Institution
(B)
Co-funding in cash
By Institution (C)
Total Co-funding *
(D)
ERASMUS CD IP
2 1
10 7
1 0
1 1
100,000 70,000
30,000 10,000
---
5,000
15,000 10,000
Grundtvig 3 15 0 3 200,000 45,000 --- 25,000 Comenius 2 5 0 2 40,000 5,000 --- 5,000 Minerva 10 22 0 10 1,230,000 50,000 --- 15,000
LEONARDO (excluding placements)
1
5
0
1
1,000,000
300,000
---
35,000
Jean Monnet 3 3 3 --- 10,000 10,000 --- 10,000 Acc. Measures 1 40 1 --- 100,000 5,000 --- 5,000
ERASMUS MUNDUS 2 8 0 2 250,000 10,000 5,000 20,000
TOTALS 25 115 5 20 €3,000,000 €465,000 €10,000 €140,000
EXAMPLE: EXTERNALLY FUNDED PROJECTS (2)
Fictitious Example
Benchmarks:
B:5.1: Total Value of External Project Funding (A) = €3,000,000 B:5.2: Incoming Project Funding (B)= €465,000B:5.3 Total Institutional cash co-funding (C) = €10,000 B:5.4: Total No. of partners = 25B:5.5 Geographic Coverage = No. of Countries/Regions B:5.6: No. of Projects Coordinated = 5B:5.7: Total No. of projects = 25 B:5.8: Incoming Funds (B)/ Total Funds (A)= 15.5% B:5.9: No. of Projects Coordinated/Total No. of Projects= 20% B:5.10: Co-funding(D)/Incoming Funds (A)= 4.7%B:5.11: External Incoming Funds (B)/University Budget=
€3,000,000/68, 000,000 = 4.4% [This could also be expressed as a percentage of the Institutional Research + International Relations Budget = €3,000,000/3,400,000= 88.2%]
EXAMPLE: EXTERNALLY FUNDED PROJECTS (3)
“PRIMARY DATA”:
Figure 1: Typical data base input for Externally Funded ProgrammesExternal Funding Agency: [EU] Type of Programme: [FP7]Title of Project Proposal: Project Acronym:Mode of Participation: [Coordinator]; [Partner]Name(s) of Responsible Scientist(s): Participating Department: Project Duration: Start-up Date: Closure Date: Submission Date:Total Project Budget: Institution´s Project Budget Allocation: Institution´s Total Contribution: Cash Co-funding: Contribution in-kind:Project Type: [Research]; [Non-Research] Scientific Area:External Partner(s) Details: Partner Countries: Internal Partner(s): Project Staff: [Research Assistants]; [Administrators]; [Secretarial staff]
Examples of B & PI´s (1)
• Mobility: Set target Institutional for 2010
Number of students [out/in & teachers]
Annual Rate of increase [decrease]
Previous 5-year trend:
No. of active partners [bilateral agreements]
Geographic distribution of partners
% of disciplines covered to available total
Examples of B & PI´s (2)
• Bologna Process
Annual Rate of implementation of ECTS/DS
Target date for achieving ECTS/DS Labels
Rate of implementing 3-cycle system
Degree of Compliance with National/
European Qualifications Frameworks
% Recognition of Joint Degrees
Examples of B & PI´s (3)
• Externally Funded ProjectsTotal Value of ProjectsTotal incoming Project fundsGeographic coverage of partnersNo. of partners% of projects coordinatedTotal No. of projects% of incoming funds/total project funding
Examples of B & PI´s (4)
% of co-funding/incoming fundsPrevious 5-year trend in: No. of projects Incoming funds % incoming/total value of projects % co-funding/incoming funds Success Rate of projects funded % of projects coordinated % of external funding/total Institutional budget
Examples of B & PI´s (5)
Percentage of Annual Increase [decrease]:
% change in partners
% change in geographic distribution
% change projects coordinated
% change in No. of projects funded/ funding
% change in annual institutional funding
% change in co-funding
% change success rate of projects funded
Examples of B & PI´s (6)
• Effective participation in ERA/EHEANo. of research posted createdNo. of other posts createdNo. of incoming EU researchersNo. of incoming third country researchersNo. of outgoing researchersNo. of returning researchersNo. of patentsNo. of commercial productsNo. of spin off companies
Examples of B & PI´s (7)
No. of Basic Research projects
No. European Infrastructure projects
No. of Centres of Excellence
No. of publications in international scientific journals
No. of citations in international scientific journals
Comparable PI´s would be generated
Examples of B & PI´s (8)
• Contribution to National Goals
No. of active Bilateral agreements
No. of partners/ countries/geographic coverage
Satisfaction of other national goals, ie
No. of Incubators/Science Parks
No. of private/public partnerships
EXAMPLES: POLICY PREDICTION (1)
Example 1: Linearly increasing past 5 year trendOutgoing PredictedStudents Target
* * * * *
2001 2005 2010
Predict new Benchmark but also assess required CAPACITY in Human Resources and Technical Infrastructure
EXAMPLES: POLICY PREDICTION (2)
External Predicted
Project Amount
Co-funding (2010)
Euro Rate of annual
* * increase required
* * from own budget
*
2001 2005 2010
Prediction of required co-funding
EXAMPLES: POLICY PREDICTION (3)
OutgoingTeachers * * * * Need to “bottom-out” falling trend
*
2001 2005 2010
Need to Re-engineer Policy and Administrative System
ACTION PLAN FOR REALISING A QA SYSTEM BASED ON B&PI´s
• Political decision to establish a QA system• Set institutional goals and objectives in International
Collaboration• Identify B&PI´s that satisfy HEI goals & objectives (Use
“generic” B&PI´s as basis)• Develop software to produce automatically B&PI´s from
“primary data”• Promote the required “Quality Culture”, which is necessary
to “drive” the QA system• “Centralise” data so as to enable the production of the
“Institutional Profile” as regards International Collaboration• Establish the required feedback mechanisms for
reformulation or “tuning”of the international collaboration policy, based on the results of the B&PI´s