270 likes | 489 Views
Shifting paradigms in academia during the merger. Dr S Swanepoel & Dr EL van Staden Merger conference - CSIR 8 October 2009. OUTLINE. Challenges UoT concept Structure follows strategy Mergers Case Study: TUT. CHALLENGES.
E N D
Shifting paradigms in academia during the merger Dr S Swanepoel & Dr EL van Staden Merger conference - CSIR 8 October 2009
OUTLINE Challenges UoT concept Structure follows strategy Mergers Case Study: TUT
CHALLENGES • The old Technikon sector opted for a new institutional type namely “UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY” which in addition to the merger created additional challenges: • UoT concept within the South African context • Consolidation of practices and procedures and strategies • New Academic structures • Academic departmental profile • Key performance areas within each academic appointment • type to assist the match and place process as well as new • appointments • Roles and responsibilities for each appointment level
Concept and context of a UoT • DEFINING A UNIVERSITY • “The University is an academic institution at which research is conducted and teaching and learning is offered within the organized cadre of the contact between lecturer and student, and supported by networking, cooperation and collaboration with external academic partners to create, develop and transmit new knowledge.” • DEFINING TECHNOLOGY • Technology refers to the: • “Effective and efficient application of the accumulated know-how, knowledge, skills and expertise, that when applied, will result in the output of value-added products, processes and services” • Technology straddles two issues: firstly the skill to fabricate • things and secondly the skill to manage the fabricated products. • Teaching technology – Implies an understanding of the • application of the subject in the real word. • Important to make technology productive – commercialize!
STRUCTURE FOLLOWS STRATEGY Career orientated UG Technological Competence Technology focused programmes Sustainability Acknowledged R&I expertise School & Post School engagement Technology Transfer & Innovation Sustainability in Engagement & Practice Research and Innovation in & through technology & technique in Strategic areas Characteristics of UoTs Community Involvement (social responsibility Post graduate studies Governments, Business, Industry (regional Collaboration & Partnerships) Enabling environment Entrepreneurial & innovative ethos National & International impact and recognition Access with success (SET enrolments) Commercial ventures Collaboration Student entrepreneurs
Educational concept informs the STRUCTURE • TECHNOLOGY FOCUSED PROGRAMMES: • 1. UG Career Programmes • A PQM that is: technology driven, programmes needs professional bodies • approval, employers are satisfied with graduates, responsive and • relevant to changes and needs in the labour market (just in time • education), integration of learning and work, learner centered • Staff should be: • functioning mostly on the UG level, • implement Innovative educational approaches, • have exposure and experience to and in industry, • staff has to stay abreast of new developments in technology • 2. Technological competence • Staff should be: • UTILISING technology within the teaching methodology, including IT-integration and e-learning • Apply leading edge technology • Staff abreast with technology / technological advances
Educational concept informs the STRUCTURE • RESEARCH AND INNOVATION • THROUGH TECHNOLOGY AND TECHNIQUE IN STRATEGIC AREAS • 1. Research and Innovation expertise • Staff should be: • I & R staff with doctorates or as a minimum, a masters • Nationally rated researchers and innovators, Internationally recognized as a R&I leader • delivering regular R&I outputs • Involved in International exchange and collaborations through networking • Striving to be research chairs • 2. Technology Transfer • Staff should be: • Involved in Inter & trans disciplinary R&I projects • Developing new inventions • Involved in Partnerships • Specializing in the application of knowledge and technology • 3. Postgraduate studies • M & D students in relevant R&I projects.
Mergers Key element – Government strategy No merger without pain Take 10 years to operate as a cohesive and well integrated whole Literature & research on mergers Integration of academic structures
CASE STUDY: TUT • Introduction • 3 Technikons • 99 academic departments on 3 urban learning sites • consolidation – cost effectiveness, eliminate duplication
CASE STUDY: TUT • Methodology • Flexible vs fixed structures • Determine criteria for consolidation of academic departments • Determine academic profile for departments • Develop requirements for academic staff • Develop criteria for match and place
CASE STUDY: TUT • Flexible vs Fixed structure • Advantages and disadvantages • promotions • budgeting • PDP (promotion, condition, development) • ratios • control • Hybrid approach guided by criteria & principles
CASE STUDY: TUT • Criteria for consolidation of academic departments • Adherence to a minimum of 3 criteria: • offer related programmes • at least 1 programme that progresses to a doctorate level • offer service subjects • facilitate at least 400 contact students • generate FTE’s – SET: 200 /Other: 400 or TIU 800 • Exceptions – detail motivation eg Professional Board
CASE STUDY: TUT • Academic Profile • Benchmarking: • University of Pretoria • University of Johannesburg • Cape Peninsula UOT
CASE STUDY: TUT TUT Academic Profile Structure finalised in 2007 Match & Place finalised in 2008
CASE STUDY: TUT Dr S Swanepoel & Dr EL van Staden Merger conference - WNNR 8 October 2009
CASE STUDY: TUT Departmental profiles Specific needs within TIU generation Currently TUT funded for 75,103 TIU Relating to 45,308 FTE’s TUT to migrate to a staff:student ratio of 1:33 Result 56 TIU to be generated for each SLE funded
CASE STUDY: TUT Therefore: Weighted FTE’s = 1 SLE 56 Thus: Sr lecturer (Post level 7) = 100 SLE’s Units can be allocated to a department on the number of SLE’s generated through TIU
CASE STUDY: TUT • Principles • needs driven structure • flexible structure according to TIU • fixed admin support staff - faculties and departments • staff:student ratio 1 SLE :56 TIU to determine SLE’s per dept
CASE STUDY: TUT Support staff per faculty Support staff - maximum of 5 SLE’s per faculty
CASE STUDY: TUT Criteria to determine number of staff 1. Hierarchical academic profile
CASE STUDY: TUT Criteria to determine number of staff 2. Size
CASE STUDY: TUT • Criteria to determine number of staff • Complexity and PQM • 4. Service subjects • 5. Multi learning sites
CASE STUDY: TUT New requirements for academic staff
CASE STUDY: TUT • Matching & placing of staff in new academic structure • Criteria determined – scenarios
CASE STUDY: TUT Results Application of criteria Peer review process - 2 deans Academic departments from 99 to 56