PowerPointPrsentation

1
Towards a Multi-dimensional Ranking
Transparency in Missions and Performances of
Higher Education Institutions The EU context
Sophia Eriksson Waterschoot Head of Sector Higher
Education Policy DG Education and Culture,
European Commission UNICA Rectors Seminar,
Dubrovnik, 3 July 2009
2
Outline
A. EU Context the Modernisation Agenda for
Universities B. Overview of EU-supported
transparency initiatives C. Towards a
Multi-dimensional Global Ranking D. Results of
recent Eurobarometer survey
3

• Modernisation agenda, Lisbon strategy and the
  Bologna process
• Modernisation agenda an integral part of the
  Lisbon strategy
• Co-operation in Education and Training under
  Lisbon strategy Updated Strategic Framework
  (Dec. 2008), Council conclusions (May 2009)
• Bologna process substantially contributes to the
  modernisation agenda and vice versa

4

• The Updated Strategic Framework for co-operation
  in Education and Training
• For the next 10 years
• Close synergy with the Bologna process, in
  particular with regard to quality assurance,
  recognition, mobility and transparency
  instruments
• Open Method of Cooperation - national competence,
  but the Commission facilitates and supports peer
  learning, benchmarking and co-operation

5

• The 2020 priorities of the Updated Strategic
  Framework for co-operation in Education and
  Training4 strategic objectives
• Making lifelong learning and learner mobility a
  reality
• Improving quality and efficiency of education and
  training
• Promoting equity, social cohesion and active
  citizenship
• Enhancing creativity and innovation, including
  entrepreneurship, at all levels of education and
  training

6
EU Modernisation agenda

• Communication from the Commission to the Council
  and the European Parliament (2006)
• Council Resolution on modernising universities
  for Europes competitiveness (2007)
• Report from the Commission to the Council (2008)
• Commission Communication on the modernisation
  agenda planned for 2011 (5 years after previous
  Communication)

7
Challenges EU Modernisation agenda

• European higher education is underperforming
  (compared to US)
• Not enough people participate and graduate
• Not enough lifelong learning
• Higher education is too fragmented,
  overregulated and underfunded
• Curricula not adapted to needs of labour market

8
Curricular Reforms

• Need to make curricula more flexible and better
  adapted to the needs of the labour market
• Bologna reforms (introduction 3- cycles system,
  development trustworthy QA) important
  contribution to make curricula more transparent
  and comparable and to stimulate mobility of
  students and researchers
• Mobility also stimulated by Erasmus and Erasmus
  Mundus
• Common language via EQF learning outcomes
• Optimize regulatory framework for
  university-enterprise cooperation

8
9
Governance Reform

• Institutional autonomy and full accountability
• Strategic priorities to be set by the
  institutions
• Involvement of stakeholders (employers, business)
  
• Building and rewarding good management and
  leadership

9
10
Funding Reform

• Need for more (diversified) funding in higher
  education even more important in this time of
  financial crisis
• Updated strategic framework ET new benchmark
  public private investment at least 2 of GDP
• Broaden the funding base
• Critically examine current mix of funding

10
11

• Main messages of the Modernisation agenda -
  transparency (1)
• Modern universities should dare to diversify on
  the basis of their strenghts. Not all
  institutions need the same mix between education
  and research.
• The diverse missions and performances of our
  universities should be made transparent to all
  stakeholders.

12

• Main messages of the Modernisation agenda -
  transparency (2)
• More transparency will make it easier for
  students, teachers and researchers to make an
  informed choice where and what to study and
  where to work.
• More transparency would also serve university
  management to better position themselves and
  improve their development strategies, quality
  and performances.

12
13
EU supported transparency initiatives in higher
education

• European Data Collection project
• CHEPS study  Mapping diversity of university
  profiles 
• Expert group on Asessment of University based
  Research
• Assessment of Higher Education Learning Outcomes
  (AHELO)
• Pilot project on design and testing of a
  multi-dimensional global ranking

13
14
Towards a Multi-dimensional Global University
Ranking

• Various rankings have their own purpose and
  target groups (Berlin principles)
• Shortcomings existing rankings - tendency to
  focus on research in hard sciences and ignore
  performances of universities in other areas like
  humanities, social sciences, teaching quality,
  innovation, internationalisation and community
  outreach.- focus on entire institutions, not on
  programmes/disciplines
• Therefore desirable that, based on existing
  initiatives, instruments will be developed which
  enable a multi-dimensional ranking.

14
15
Chracteristics of multi-dimensional ranking to be
developed and tested

• Multi-dimensional and user-driven (different
  users and target groups can choose an own  smart
  ranking )
• Independent (not run by governments or
  universities)
• Global (covering institutions in Europe and other
  continents)

15
16
Planning of the project

• End of May 2009 Start of project
• End of December 2009 Final Report design phase
  
• January 2010 Start testing phase
• End of May 2011 Final Report testing phase

16
17
Eurobarometer survey 2009

• 15,000 students surveyed, in 30 European
  countries
• 83 think that independent rankings on quality of
  universities and programmes would help them
  decide where to study
• Some differences between countries high rates in
  UK, PT, PL, SI, IE, SK, RO, NO, LT (above 87)
  lower rates in BE, TR, HR, DK (less than 72)
• Particular strong views of part-time students at
  Masters level and in terms of field of study for
  medical students

17
18
Eurobarometer survey 2009

• 74 state that factors such as location, friends
  and costs were also considered when to choose
  where to study
• 36 feel available information is not sufficient
  for choosing HEI
• 81 think that students should be involved in
  quality reports and rankings of HEIs
• High variation between countries highest in SI,
  SK, RO, No UK, PL (above 89) lowest in FI (46)
  and BE (64)

18
19
Thank you!

• Website of the Directorate General for Education
  and Culture within the European Commission
• http//ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/index_en
  .htm

19