partnerships and internationalization measures from a data ... · online questionnaire among fub...
TRANSCRIPT
Partnerships and Internationalization Measures from a data-driven perspective
Britta PielFreie Universität BerlinCenter for International Cooperation
2
WHO WE ARE
3
Who We Are
one of Germany’s 11 Universities of Excellence
founded in 1948, with strong international orientation
32,000 students, app. 500 professors
66 bachelor’s, 110 master’s, 23 structured doctoral programs
11 Departments plus Charité – University Medicine Berlin (joint faculty with the Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin)
4
International Network University
Excellence Initiative: established in 2007, renewed in 2012, up to 2017
“to make efficient use of networks & focus on mutual benefits of partnerships”
key measures: liaison offices, strategic partnerships, seed funds
seven liaison offices set up in between 2005 and 2010
5
Strategic Focus on Internationalization
University of British Columbia
St Petersburg University
Hebrew University of Jerusalem Peking University
Part of FUB‘s „International Network University“ Strategy Liaison Offices Strategic Partnerships Strategic Unit: Center for International Cooperation Funding for internationalization measures
6
Guiding PrincipleInternationalization is a basic orientation guiding all activities in teaching and
research and a tool to further advance the university‘s performance andacademic excellence.
Specific Goals recruit and retain excellent students as well as promising researchers, university
teachers from abroad
foster international mobility of all university members
develop innovative programs and projects
make efficient use of networks and cooperations
focus on selected, mutually beneficial partnerships
Internationalization at Freie Universität
7
International students & staffCurrently from abroad:
8 % of the students in bachelor’s programs
17 % of the students in master’s programs
31 % of the doctoral candidates
10 % of the professors
In Germany the first choice for fellows of the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, no. one for Erasmus students, no. one for DAAD scholars
More than 100 partnerships with universities around the world in 67 countries plus about 340 agreements within the European exchange programs
8
WHY LOOK AT DATA?
9
10
Different words, different rationales assess: see what you have done benchmark: see where you stand evaluate: see whether you have reached your goals profile: see where you might be going…
Goals to be accountable to leadership, funding agencies… to foster (internal) transparency to optimize strategic planning to become more effective…
11
(STRATEGIC) PARTNERSHIPS
12
Global Trend
„Strategic Partnerships“ are increasingly discussed and developed amonguniversities worldwide
in Germany, introduction of new funding opportunities specifically for strategicpartnerships (i.e. DAAD Program „Strategic Partnerships and Strategic Networks“)
not much research on SPs in higher education:
International survey and report on strategic partnerships by Institute of International Education and Freie Universität Berlin (Report in IIE/DAAD „Global Perspectives on Strategic International Partnerships“, 2016)
The EAIE Barometer: „International Strategic Partnerships“
13
Survey on International Strategic Partnerships
online-survey conducted in early 2015 by IIE/FUB
initially 258 participating institutions
91 qualified to complete entire questionnaire
persons in charge of SPs at institutions that have established SPs and thatdifferentiate between SPs and „non-SPs“
North America (28), Latin America (9), Africa and Middle East (3), Asia (4), Australasia (13), Europe (34)
14
Goals
40%
19%
36%
5%
“Has your institution developed ways/means to evaluate the strategic partnership, its benefits and effectiveness?”
YesNoNot yet, but we plan toI don't know
15
Partner Selection SP are mostly developed out of existing partnerships
Majority (65%) developed their SPs through a consultation process, incl. top-down as well as bottom-up elements (vs 16% purely top-down)
A variety of indicators used to identify strategic partnerships:
Highest rated factors for identifying SPs: • potential for further development• specific research strengths of partner institution• compatibility of academic profiles• degree of interest among faculty• pre-existing formal relations
Lowest rated factors for identifying SPs: • personal preferences of institution‘s leaders• international rankings• political reasons/national priorities• history of previous cooperation (joint research, publications etc)
16
Strategic Partnerships –Means to an end, not an end in itself
Objectives:
deliver additional quality & opportunities for research and teaching
deliver complementary strengths
promote sustainable research cooperation
provide attractive options for students, early-career researchers and established faculty
increase international co-publications
increase FUB‘s visibility in specific regions and globally
Question: Which partners and in which regions are the right ones? Answer: Identify particularly synergetic partnerships in particular regions.
17
Top-down
focus on regions/countries with high and/orgrowing research potential
SPs must mirror faculties‘ research interest
partnerships should have a history ofcollaboration at min. 3 departments
availability of funding opportunities should betaken into consideration
process managed by a central unit (Center forInternational Cooperation)
Identification Process
18
Bottom-up
Target Agreements: Departments map their international activities and develop their own internationalisation agendas
Consultation process with Deans
Analysis of existing partnerships (level of activity, mobility, etc)
Analysis of third party funded research projects (FUB database)
Analysis of research output (co-publications), where data available
Analysis of incoming guest scholars / fellows
Identification Process
19
First phase non-EU/overseas:
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem (since 2011)
Peking University (since 2011)
St. Petersburg State University (since 2012)
University of British Columbia (since 2014)
University of California at Berkeley (since Sept 2016)
Second phase: stronger focus on Europe:
Next: University of Zurich (agreement in development)
And consultations with 2 more potential strategic partner universities
Current Strategic Partnerships
20
Current joint activities involving approx. 100 researchers from FUB und HUJI
Joint research projects / joint publications Joint Seed Money Fund Joint PhD agreement Joint PostDoc Fellowships Joint PhD Program „Human Rights Under Pressure“ Joint annual PhD workshops Joint initiative in online education Student exchange Faculty mobility Erasmus+ Regular consultations between university leadership Administrative staff exchange Joint press releases / marketing Joint fundraising
Example: Bilateral FUB – HUJI
21
University Alliance for Sustainability promote joint research and teaching on sustainability
related issues
foster dialogue and inter-institutional learning with regard to sustainable campus management
Example: Multilateral & thematically focused
Strategic research network focusing on the topic of “Principles of Cultural Dynamics”
Combines expertise of leading humanities institutes/centers
Principles of Cultural Dynamics
22
Some observations
mapping process first start, but possibly never comprehensive
data sometimes surprising
good tool to develop, end, or focus partnerships
updates can be used for monitoring
no evaluation mechanism
informed strategic planning
23
LIAISON OFFICES
24
Global Network of Liaison Offices
25
Main tasks
increase global visibility and reach through marketingand advising
recruit promising talent
support existing partnerships and exchanges
develop new research cooperation
support FUB researchers and events
build local alumni networks
26
Why evaluate?Formal reasons:
accountability to funding agency
evidence-base for discussions about the network‘s future after 2017
Content reasons:
improving internationalisation through
monitoring of activities, procedures, and performances
providing new impulses for future work
identification of new goals
understanding our partners’ needs
27
Structure of the evaluationStep 1: Collecting information
liaison offices‘ self reports, supported by interviews with liaison offices‘ heads, where necessary
online questionnaire among FUB professors
online questionnaire among local partners
official university statistics on personnel, students, and funding
Step 2: Giving recommendations
external evaluation commission composed of international experts (e.g. German Rectors‘ Conference, ACA, MPG, AvH…)
meeting in January 2016 with FUB‘s Executive Board
Step 3: Decisions
28
A few sample topics & questions self reports:
• What does your daily work look like?
• What‘s the system in the country you work in?
online questionnaire among FUB professors:
• Which services have you used, and how would you rate them?
• What‘s important to you in internationalization?
online questionnaire among local partners:
• How important are the offices for your work?
• How could cooperation with FUB be improved?
official university statistics:
• Have # of PhD students changed?
29
Example: Recruitment of PhD Students
30
Select results measurable internationalization effects through the offices
concept of liaison offices strengthens the institutional strategy of„International Network University“
very diverse picture depending on the country and its politics
very diffentiated usage by different user groups / subject areas with a strong overall usage and satisfaction rate
high satisfaction rate among German and international partners
in high accordance with the university‘s profile and mission
continue with differentiated sets of goals and tasks
31
Lessons Learned
define your objectives carefully: know what you want to learn whenassessing / evaluating / mapping
find suitable and manageable ways of measuring
don‘t measure things just because you can
have a plan on what you want to do with the results
keep things on par with your resources
32
Thank you for your attention!Contact: [email protected]