170 likes | 297 Views
Presentation of EQ11 Advisory Group. May 6 2011. The Approach. Faculty reflections Faculty visit and discussions Discussion papers Our challenge was to make sense of these and use these sources of data to make some informed and useful observations and recommendations. Our Instructions.
E N D
Presentation of EQ11 Advisory Group May 6 2011
The Approach • Faculty reflections • Faculty visit and discussions • Discussion papers • Our challenge was to make sense of these and use these sources of data to make some informed and useful observations and recommendations
Our Instructions • Not an evaluation • Help to advise the University on enhancement of education quality • Be clear, short and usable
General Observations • Many exciting and positive things happening • Great deal of energy • EQ11 was constructive – created creative dialogue • Tension between teaching and research • Different views on Ph.D. studies • “One University” vs. Faculties • Presentism • Faculty centered thinking • Diversity in practices • Focus on internationalisation • Student involvement • Tactical rather than strategic thinking
External Challenges • New political environment – autonomy • Fees for non EU students • Recruitment, retention and generational change of staff • Rankings • New student generation • Meeting societal needs • Widening participation
Internal Challenges • Alignment between aspiration and operation • The new autonomy of the university – impact on promotion and recruitment • What to do with EQ11 and ownership • Ownership and engagement with change agenda • Balance: teaching and research • Balance: undergraduate and postgraduate training • Quality of Ph.D. training • Decline in student numbers – adjustment to new student cultures • Networking and experimentation in education • ICT to enhance education and student experience
Lund a “connected university” • Connected to: • Society • Students • Faculties and departments • International • Roots and history as well as future
Why a connected university? The world is knowledge-intensive, fast-changing, complex, global . . . and requires a connected university across fields of study to develop new knowledge and competencies suitable to understanding and acting in such a world.
And how can this be done? • Connected to society • Leading debate and dialogue • Relationships with stakeholders • Government • Industry • Community - • Connected to students • Education, research, support • Connected to each other (faculties and departments) • Education, research, support; interdisciplinary teaching and research; structures, processes, and culture • Connected to international world • Networks, partnerships and collaborations • Strategic and high quality
And how do we do this? • Connected to our past and the future • values connected to its past, but inform its future • through its students needs and expectations • and the world as it is today • global issues • challenges of the contemporary world • technology • globalisation
Disconnections • Balance between teaching and research • Locus of control • Central, rather than faculty, driving and steering • Resource allocation principles create barriers for interdisciplinary teaching • New activities are started before others are completed
Dilemmas (1) • Incentive for cross faculty collaborations in teaching • An ongoing dialogue between faculties creates possibilities for cross faculty teaching BUT university policies and financial structures create barriers and disincentives that inhibit doing this • Teaching is said to be important BUT reward and recognition is through research • New generation of teachers and researchers required BUT processes impede this being done quickly • Ph.D. is an education BUT: - is financed largely by external research funds. - is sometimes regarded as workforce • QA is inconsistent in Ph.D. programs
Dilemmas (2) • Both students and teachers want to improve quality BUT have different time horizons • An organizational structure that allows innovations in teaching/programs BUT does not involve a systematic sharing of knowledge • Some faculties have relatively scarce resources BUT have many students
Recommendations (1) • Move to a student centered environment ”Students as change agents” • Incentive systems and “seed-money” for cross-institutional collaborations • Build on individual faculty strengths in teaching and learning through networks and seminars to communicate best practice • Recognize and reward teaching - ”teaching counts” • Implement systematic QA in Ph.D. education • Put structures in place to support Ph.D. students • Align plans across the university to ensure consistency and coherence – cost benefit
T&L Network to Build on Strengths LTH: Pedagogy Academy Law: Student-Centered Environment Medicine: Medical Education Center Science: Teaching Close to Research Economics & Management: Case Teaching SpecializedCenters: Asia House* Theology & Humanities: Supplemental Instruction Social Science: Mentoring New Teachers Fine & Performing Arts: Inter Arts Center Research in Ed Center* * In planning stage
Recommendations (2) • Reinforce and institutionalize the Pedagogical Academies in all faculties • Improve recruitment processes without compromising quality • Provide efficient electronic support - invest in e-learning • Institutionalize the. ”EQ11-dialogue” on a 4-6 year time-scale • Create networks for sharing good ideas • Promote teaching as a research activity – scholarship of teaching • Audit of teaching facilities across the university
Recommendations (3) 5 Bs Basis for recommendations - External factors, Quality and relevance - Internal factors, Connected University and faculty diversity respected Balance of education and research - Faculty strategy based on EQ 11 and new incentives - Make sure education is rewarded in merits Basic principles - Employabily, civic engagement and critical academic thinking Bank of ideas - Best practice and incentives – sharing and seed money - Barriers for cross border – suggestions on how to overcome Better processes - Use of ICT, QA of PhD education