GHADA SOUFAN Managing Director, ProCare Services Ho Chi Menh City, December 2009

1. Higher Education Contributions &Implications in Economic Development: A Canadian Experience inCollaborative Projects with a Few Countries GHADA SOUFAN Managing Director, ProCare Services Ho Chi Menh City, December 2009

2. ProCare ServicesInternational Consulting Firm • Actively engaged in an emerging Canada-based HE knowledge & resource network. • Lead role in projects for new universities:- • Botswana: Framework Design for the Botswana International University of Science & Technology (BIUST) • Egypt : Feasibility Study, Planning Analysis & Systems Development of the Ahram Canadian University (ACU)

3. International Student Contributions Research Contributions Investments Driven by Developing Universities Economic added valueof universities

4. Financial Contributionby International Students • International student recruitment actively pursued by OECD countries • 500,000 students in USA = 14 billion $ • In Canada, 6.5 billion dollars* (this statistic includes elementary, secondary and technical college students and is not limited university as is the US statistic)

5. Other contributionsby International Students • International students contribute indirectly: • Increased presence of highly qualified people and ideas from around the world • Increased long term connections leading to International business and trade opportunities

6. International Students inEmerging Economies • Increasingly more active recruitment of regional students, by offering: • Better facilities & higher quality standards • Internationally recognized programs & degrees • International links & exposure • facilitating increased student and graduate mobility for further education &/or work placements abroad

7. Economic Growth Driven ByUniversity Research • Emergence of industrial clusters. • Foster the creation of new businesses and boost productivity. • through R&D and private sector interactionin the region and abroad.

8. ExampleIndustrial Research in Canada • The university sector is the second largest performer of research in Canada. • Universities performed 36% of R&D,worth $10.4 billion (2007)

9. Industrial ResearchCanadian Statistics In Canada between 1999 and 2003: • New patent applications from universitiesincreased by 91% • Spin off companies resulting from university researchincreased by 25% • New licences awarded to universitiesincreased by 82%

10. Investments Driven by Developing Universities • Private Sector Investments:- • Housing • Services including medical • Entertainment and diversions • Light manufacturing • Public Sector Investments:- • Roads • Communication • Government building

11. For universities in emerging economiesto play such a central role in economic development: MODELS & Paths

12. University Development Options • Upgrading Existing Institutions • Merging Existing Institutions • Establishing New Institutions • Focus of this presentation

13. Challenge of New Universities • The choice of many countries • even those with strong existing universities includingIndia, Viet Nam and Egypt • The main challenge • Building credibility • Competition with more established older universities

14. Advantage of New Universities • Less constrains of history & inherited traditions = More Potential • to look forward not backward • to look outward not inward • to be innovative, adapting rapidly & effectively to dynamic & emerging conditions • Provided setting bold, yet realistic goals, while summoning the will to make them all a reality.

15. Satellite Model Franchise Model Out-Sourced Model Integrated Progressive model New Institutional Models

16. Satellite Model • New university engages 1 or more other universities to • deliver its/their “home” programming at satellite, as a branch • award foreign credits and degrees to students. • WEAKNESSES: • The satellite is a stage for a foreign enterprise. • Setbacks upon changing enterprise decisions abroad. • STRENGTHS: • Relative lower cost & quicker programming launch. • Students receive internationally accredited degrees right away.

17. Franchise Model • New university engages 1 or more foreign universities • wholesale import of programs to be delivered by local &/or regional professors • WEAKNESSES: • Does not reflect the local context and teaching/research needs. • Does not establish a national institution – weak local ownership. • STRENGTHS: • Quickly establishes programming. • Resulting university relies on the reputation of the exporter. • May help the new university to quickly establish credibility.

18. Out-Sourcing Model • New university engages an interim partner • to design &/or operate university, sharing risks & benefits for a set initial period of time. • WEAKNESSES: • Risk of profit focus at expense of academic quality. • qualitative features compromised to increase profitability and expedite return on investment • Little integration of wider economic considerations • if any occurs, it is often incidental rather than intentional. • STRENGTHS: • Initial savings in contract management & setup costs.

19. OUR TRIED MODEL An Integrated Progressive Model • relies on building a strong national institution,using Canadian and international best practices. • promotes collegial two-way cooperationbetween Canadian and national professors and university administrators • Leads to long term relations & benefits • student & professorial exchanges, joint research, joint degrees, mutual recognition and other cooperation modes and linkages.

20. Integrated Progressive Model STRENGTHS: • Yields a strong national institution • reflecting “contextualized” international best practices • Builds long term relationships between institutions • A variety of universities work under coordination of a core team, providing consistent and consistent output WEAKNESSES: • Requires relatively more time & effortto achieve desired results. • International recognition is not immediate;it is built over time.

21. Basic & detailed Design Components Program Integration Features Enrolment Planning As Core Integrating Engine Financial Planning Integrator Model Adaptability & Viability

22. Basic Design Components • Background Study & Strategic Positioning • contextual global, regional, national and sectoral framework • Branding, Image & Organizational Culture • Organizational Development • academic & corporate governance & management structures • Academic Planning • academic program and curricula framework • student management and enrolment planning framework • accreditation and quality assurance framework • Technical Study • Identifying facility and infrastructure requirements • Identifying staffing requirements and hiring strategies; • Examining cost and revenue elements and factors • Financial forecasting

23. Detailed Design Components • Academic /Research Program Development • Curriculum Plans & Academic /Research Programs Detailing • Courseware Syllabus Design/Review • Student Academic Progress & Evaluation • Defining Support Systems • Student Administration & Registrar Operations • Knowledge Management (Library & ICT) Services • Career & Work Placement and Advising and Counselling Services • Human Resources Management • Quality Assurance Strategy, Structures & Systems • Detailed Strategic & Operational Planning & Budgeting

24. Program Integration Features • Focus on program integration, for achieving reasonable critical mass to deliver desired efficiencies • Horizontally(inter-disciplinary; across faculties and departments) • Vertically(at under-grad, grad and post-grad levels) • With a strong “research – teaching” nexus • In thematic areas of highest potential of strength, derived from national/regional socio-economic development agendas • coinciding with national and regional prioritiesthat are not yet adequately addressed elsewhere

25. Core Integrating Engine:Enrolment Modelling • Links a gradual increase in no. of various studentswith a commensurate gradual increase in • number of various levels of identified programs • the required number of faculty to deliver that increasing number of multi-level programs to the increasing number of students • the required number of support & admin staff • the required facilities to serve the number of users

26. Financial Planning IntegratorTo be both financially & academically viable Every desired academic & corporate feature of the university gets • linked to the dynamic enrolment model • translated into required resources(staff, facilities, costs and time frames) • examined in terms of expected outcomes and returns(financial and qualitative) • weighed for impact on optimal investment & student fee levels

27. Ghada Soufan ProCare Services, Canada ghada@procare-inc.ca THANK YOU