Assessing Performance within Higher Education in Norway

1. Assessing Performance within Higher Education in Norway Ole-Jacob SKODVIN Marie WIEN FJELL Geir Åge ANDREASSEN Arne MOI Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research Department of Higher Education

2. Background: Result oriented planning (ROP) – Management by objectives • Since 1980s: increased focus on quality, efficiency and effectiveness in the public sector in general • All Ministries in Norway were mandated to implement reform measures • Resembling those that often come under the “new public management umbrella”

3. “The new public management umbrella” • Decentralisation of tasks from the central level and increased institutional autonomy • Increased emphasis on results and output, introduction of systematic evaluation activities • More power to consumers of public goods • A clearer divide between service funding and service production • Increased competition, often by allowing private actors to compete in the public service production • Privatisation of public service production

4. Result-oriented planning (ROP) or Management by objectives • Introduction of result-oriented planning (ROP): • a new accounting system for the public sector and systematic use of evaluations in all public sectors • In HE: Management by objectives • Since 1990s: the main principle for the governance of higher education institutions (HEIs) • As a result of the Norwegian Quality Reform (2002-2006), all higher education institutions were given significantly greater autonomy in managing and organising their activities • Risk assessment/risk management

5. Management by objectives within higher education We have four main objectives: • Universities and university colleges should offer education of high international quality • Universities and university colleges should obtain results of high international quality in research and development work • Universities and university colleges should be educational institutions and research institutions with integrity and ability to meet the needs of the society • Management of employees and economy at the universities and university colleges should secure efficient exploitation of resources

6. New ways of governing HEIs • Management by objectives has made the previous micromanagement of HEIs outdated • The institutions have been given more autonomy, while the Ministry has developed tools for assessing in which degree HEIs fulfil the objectives • Two main approaches for governing HEIs: • Performance based funding system • Annual consultative meetings • Indicators are essential for measuring goal achievement

7. Objective 1: Education of high international quality

8. Objective 2: Results of high international quality in research and development work

9. Objective 3: Integrity and ability to meet the needs of the society

10. Objective 4: Efficient exploitation of resources in management of employees and economy

11. Challenges • Only indirect indicators for measuring quality in education • Few indicators measuring integrity and ability to meet the needs of the society • We need better indicators for measuring effectiveness • Development of more precise indicators will improve our ability to measuring goal achievement and governing the HEIs • Participation in the StatRes pilot project is one of our strategies for improving our indicators

12. Examples of prospective indicators

13. Further information Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research: • www.odin.dep.no/kd/english Norwegian higher education system: • www.studyinnorway.no