Sponsoring in by mikeholy

VIEWS: 56 PAGES: 29

									Key Considerations to make a University
    Relevant Today and Tomorrow




           Prof. Dr.-Ing. H. Winkler
                    INCHER
          University Kassel, Germany
                 Content

– Part I:
  - External relations of U´s
  - Structural and organisatinal development
  - Studying, teaching, and learning
  - Research at U level
- Part II
  - Collaboration with German U´s
  - Tips for sustainable fundraising
               External Relations of U´s


                                                                   Deregulation
                                  State                            (More autonomy)


                                                                  Client orientation
                                                                  (commercialisation)
                           HE

                                      ?
 Science                                                            Market




(cf. B. Clark: Perspectives on Higher Education; Berkeley/L.A./London: U Cal Press 1984)
             Actors around U`s

• State: Accreditation
• Market = Clients
  – Students pay tuition fees, mainly born by
  – Parents
  – Owners of U
  – Employers
  – Last but not least: Alumni
• Scientific „oligarchy“ or community:
  professors, lecturers, academic staff
Example for External Relationship:
              UIL
• UIL = University – Industry – Linkages
• Current Situation: weak linkages
• Future Situation: strong linkages
  – Instruments:
       • UIL Office = Transfer unit, incubator
       • Internship programmes
       • Placement center
       • Tracer Studies
  (see the following examples for „mismatch“ between U´s and outer
     world due to over- or under-qualification and cyclic and dynamic
     structure of labour market)
   Examples for Over- and Under-Education
                                         (percent)



                       Netherlands        Spain         Portugal              UK                 US
                Year   1960    1995    1985    1990    1985    1992    1986        1991   1969        1984

Overeducation           7      24      17       15      18      33      31         13     35          33
Proper match            58     63      60       69      63      29      52         70     na          47
Undereducation          36     12      23      15      19       38     17          17     na          20
Method                  JA     WA      WA      RM      RM       JA     WA          RM     WA          WA




Source: Hartog, “Human Capital as an Instrument of Analysis for the Economics of Education”,
European Journal of Education, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2000, p. 15.
                                                    Some results:
        Competencies and Job Requirements:
                   Leadership
                                      Work Requirements                        Competencies At Time of Graduation
                        Total                   57                                          28
                          JP                        56                                      28
                          EU                    57                                          28


                          CZ                   61                                       26
                         NO                    61                                            30
                          SE             69                                                            42
              Country




                           FI                        53                                 23
                          UK              67                                                          38
                          NL                         54                                     29
                          DE                        56                            15
                          AT                        55                                 21
                                                                                                  „Underqualified“
                          FR                               44                          21
                          ES                              44                                 31
                           IT                       57                                           35

                                100     75                50    25         0           25                  50   75   100
                                                                Percent of Graduates

Source: CHEERS Graduate Survey, INCHER U Kassel
                     Some results:
           Competencies and Job Requirements:
                 Problem-solving Ability
                              Work Requirements                    Competencies At Time of Graduation
          Total          86                                                                56
            JP           87                                                      39
            EU           86                                                                  58


           CZ            85                                                      41
           NO           90                                                                        64
            SE          89                                                                              75
Country




             FI         90                                                                    59
            UK                80                                                                  65
            NL          89                                                                        64
            DE          88                                                                   59
            AT          88                                                                 58
            FR                80                                                        52
            ES                80                                                      51        „Underqualified“
             IT              82                                                       47

                  100              75     50      25           0         25        50                  75    100
                                                       Percent of Graduates
    Source: CHEERS Graduate Survey
Relevance of University Today and Tomorrow

• Relevance for whom?
   – Society = Development
   – Students = Employability
   – Staff = Promotion
   – Parents = Quality for tuition fees
   – Owners = Efficiency, accountability
   – Employers = Qualified human resources
   – Science = Quality
   – State = Quality
                   Perspectives of HE Research
• Mode 1: Today
•   Definition of problems merely by academic research interest of single scientists
•   Disciplinarity
•   Homogenity
•   Hierarchic and traditionally formal
•   Quality control: mainly by "Peer review"
• Mode 2: Tomorrow
•   Definition of problems with the intention to develop appliccable solutions for existing
    problems
•   Comprehensive and complex, even if local and specific problems are tackled
•   inter-, multi- and, trans-disciplinary
•   Heterogenity
•   Non-hierarchic and temporarely in form of co-operative projects
•   socially responsible and self-reflective
•   Quality control: Process and Out-put Evaluation with complex indicators




    Source: Change of Knowledge Production as a Challenge for Institutions of Higher Education in Societies in
        Transition (cf. Gibbons et al. „The New Production of Knowledge; London/Sage1994)
    Often expressed Demand for Curriculum Revision
Despite the variety of fields of studies, economic sectors and countries, the
  variety of experts„ views, the uncertainty of future developments and a
  broad range of possible options for the actors, most HE experts agree in
  stating similar demands for change in HE curricula vis-a-vis employment:

    –   Increasing professional relevance
    –   More practice-oriented study
    –   Learning to learn (preparation for lifelong learning)
    –   Learning working techniques (problem-solving, working
        under pressure etc.)
    –   Emphasis on socio-communicative skills
    –   Transferable skills
    –   Computer skills
    –   Preparation for international mobility (academic, linguistic,
        cultural)
    –   Training for self-management of career and life
    –   Support for job search and transition to employment
          The „Baldridge Programme“
• This programme was implemented by State Min. for
  Economy Baldridge for businesses in the USA.
• In the early 2000s it was adopted for development of
  Higher Education institutions as well.
• It is meant to raise the overall quality towards excellency.
• It starts with a self evaluation of all relevant processes
  within a U and covers several areas
   (see next Diagramme)
• The most important area is to get clear information about
  the cost structure of a University
The „Baldridge Programme“ for Excellence
                  in HE




           Framework and Categories
Strategic Investment
 Studying, Teaching and Learning

Experience shows:
         • I hear > I forget
   • I see > I can remember
      • I do > I can perform
                       Learner Types
There is more than one type of learning. A committee
  of collegues, led by Benjamin Bloom (1956),
  identified three domains of educational activities:
• Cognitive: mental skills (Knowledge)
• Affective: growth in feelings or emotional areas
  (Attitude)
• Psychomotor: manual or physical skills (Skills)

This taxonomy of learning behaviors can be thought of
  as “the goals of the learning process.” That is, after a
  learning episode, the learner should have acquired
  new skills, knowledge, and/or attitudes.
                     Bloom´s Taxonomy
• Remembering: can the student recall or remember the information?
  (define, duplicate, list, memorize, recall, repeat, reproduce state)
• Understanding: can the student explain ideas or concepts? (classify,
  describe, discuss, explain, identify, locate, recognize, report, select,
  translate, paraphrase)
• Applying: can the student use the information in a new way? (choose,
  demonstrate, dramatize, employ, illustrate, interpret, operate, schedule,
  sketch, solve, use, write)
• Analyzing: can the student distinguish between the different parts?
  (appraise, compare, contrast, criticize, differentiate, discriminate,
  distinguish, examine, experiment, question, test)
• Evaluating: can the student justify a stand or decision? (appraise, argue,
  defend, judge, select, support, value, evaluate)
• Creating: can the student create new product or point of view?
  (assemble, construct, create, design, develop, formulate, write)
cont´d
  Dublin descriptors for Qualifications = Outcome

• Students who graduated as Bachelors
   – have demonstrated knowledge and understanding in a field of
     study that builds upon general secondary education and is
     typically at a level supported by advanced textbooks; such
     knowledge provides an underpinning for a field of work or
     vocation, personal development, and further studies to complete
     the first cycle;
   – can apply their knowledge and understanding in occupational
     contexts;
   – have the ability to identify and use data to formulate responses
     to well-defined concrete and abstract problems;
   – can communicate about their understanding, skills and activities,
     with peers, supervisors and clients;
   – have the learning skills to undertake further studies with some
     autonomy.


 Source: Dublin Descriptors 2004
Students after completion of the second cycle
               (Master Degree)
– have demonstrated knowledge and understanding that is
  founded upon and extends and/or enhances that typically
  associated with Bachelor‟s level, and that provides a basis or
  opportunity for originality in developing and/or applying ideas,
  often within a research context;
– can apply their knowledge and understanding, and problem
  solving abilities in new or unfamiliar environments within broader
  (or multidisciplinary) contexts related to their field of study;
– have the ability to integrate knowledge and handle complexity,
  and formulate judgements with incomplete or limited information,
  but that include reflecting on social and ethical responsibilities
  linked to the application of their knowledge and judgements;
– can communicate their conclusions, and the knowledge and
  rationale underpinning these, to specialist and non-specialist
  audiences clearly and unambiguously;
– have the learning skills to allow them to continue to study in a
  manner that may be largely self-directed or autonomous.
 Students after completion of the third cycle
                                (PhD)

– have demonstrated a systematic understanding of a field of study and
  mastery of the skills and methods of research associated with that field;
– have demonstrated the ability to conceive, design, implement and adapt
  a substantial process of research with scholarly integrity;
– have made a contribution through original research that extends the
  frontier of knowledge by developing a substantial body of work, some of
  which merits national or international refereed publication;
– are capable of critical analysis, evaluation and synthesis of new and
  complex ideas;
– can communicate with their peers, the larger scholarly community and
  with society in general about their areas of expertise;
– can be expected to be able to promote, within academic and professional
  contexts, technological, social or cultural advancement in a knowledge based
  society.
Possibility of Collaboration with German U`s

• Idea for collaboration: mutual interests
• Collaboration as „joint venture“
• Different forms (see next foil)
• On comparable level = „even steven“
• Vertical and horizontal factors: superiority
  vs. inferiority complex
• Partnerships: not at first, starting with
  individuals, departments, faculties
                     Areas of Collaboration

    • Exchange: Staff, students, (head officers)
    • Shared Study Programmes: up to the level of
      „double degrees“
    • Research co-operation (fields, methods):
      individually, participation in int´l projects,
      networking
        – Information about programmes on Internet: HRK.de,
          Hochschulkompass.de; DAAD.de; campus
          germany.de; AvH.de; IAESTE; GATE.de
Existing partnerships with Uganda U´s = 6; 5 at Makerere U, 1 at Mbarara U;
Proposal: U Eichstätt at www.KU Eichstaett.de; U Östrich-Winkel at
www.ebs.edu/index.php; U Herdecke, Zeppelin U; U´s of Applied Sciences
Example: Knowledge Gain through Participation in
             IAESTE Programme

                                        Praktische
                                        Fertigkeiten
    Cultural life                               5
                                                             Theoretische
                                               4,5
    Kulturelles Leben (Kunst, Musik                          Kenntnisse
    usw.)                                       4
                                               3,5

         Sitten, Gebräuche,                     3                    Working procedures
         Traditionen, Religion                 2,5                  Kenntnisse von
                                                2                   Arbeitsverfahren
                                               1,5
                                                1


    Social structure
    Sozialstruktur des                                              Methodenkenntnisse
    Gastlands

   Working conditions
    Arbeitsplatzbedingungen im                               Material- und
    Gastland                                                 Werkstoffkenntnisse

                                  Beschäftigungssystem des
                                  Gastlands                                 vorher     Before
                                 Labour market                              nachher    After
  Fund Raising and Marketing of Universities


                        U development and
                       strategic management




                   Operational     Public     Alumni
Fundraising
                    Marketing     Relations




Source: Fischer 2008
                    Tips for Fundraising




Source: OECD 2004
        Tips for Generation of Funds

• European Commission 2008: „People do
  not give to people. They give to people
  with causes.“
• Additional „income generating“ activities
  are:
  – Knowledge Transfer through Research:
    intellectual property rights, patents, royalties
  – Sale of spare capacities: space, consultancy,
    services
Sponsoring in D
HE Sponsoring of German Companies




    Percentage of     Percentage of
     sponsoring       Eucational
     Companies        Sponsoring

								
To top