Joint Programmes Require Joint Forces: the Management Aspect

1. Joint Programmes Require Joint Forces: the Management Aspect BRIDGE PROJECT FINAL CONFERENCE Francesco Girotti International Relations Division, Bologna University JOIMAN project‘s coordinator 18 October 2012, Malta

2. Joint Programmes: Integrated study programmes offered by 2 or more institutions leading to the award of a Double, Multiple or Joint Degree • JOIMAN focused on the Administration and Management of JP WHY? • Because of the Erasmus Mundus impact • Because of the nature of the network HOW? • Surveys to JP coordinators (Master, Doctorate, EU&NonEU), study visits, international conferences, papers, discussions, networks STARTING POINTS

3. 3 main messages: • There are different models of Joint Programmes, with different levels of integration and different impact on the planning, organisation and management of the programmes themselves • Institutional strategy, support and commitment are crucial for the implementation of Joint Programmes • Being aware of the processes allows to think in advance JOIMAN FINDINGS AT A GLANCE

4. Joint Admnistration of students and ad hoc services Highest level of Integration (EM Model) Joint QA measures Common budget and tuition fees Jointly developed curriculum (new, learning outcomes based,) Focus on international students MESSAGE 1: DIFFERENT MODELS QA measures standards jointly agreed Curriculum based on existing courses/ exploitation of excellences (Comparison of learning outcomes) Jointly agreed students’ services and standards Based on own institution tuition policies Focus on local students Lowest level of Integration (Structured mobility in Bilateral coop.) Curriculum based on existing comparable courses (input based)

5. MESSAGE 1: DIFFERENT MODELS (DOCTORATES) 5

6. Positioning your joint programme in the appropriate level of integration has a deep impact on the management of the joint programme itself. • I.E: Large integrated consortium: increase the critical mass, share of resources and expertise, increase the quality of the mobility offer BUT more coordination efforts and costs (meetings, staff mobility etc) more harmonization problems (procedures, legislations, cultures) • I.E: targeting international students: more chances to attract best students, creation of a real international environment BUT more efforts in marketing the programme, more efforts in the ICT infrastructures, more efforts in services for students etc MESSAGE 1: DIFFERENT MODELS

7. Most common obstacles detected: • Legislation on joint degrees • Institutional regulations • Different Education Systems (length of study, accreditation) • Tuition fees policies • Funds and Human Resources MESSAGE 2: INSTITUTIONAL COMMITMENT

8. To prepare the ground through external actions • To advocate changes at national level • Developing a network-based strategy • To prepare the ground through internal actions • Creating appropriate structures for the development and implementation of JP • Creating/adapting internal rules • Coordinating the efforts of the many actors involved • Providing funds for new initiatives • Promoting the professional development of administrators and academics involved • Fostering the initiatives of academics WHY INSTITUTIONAL COMMITTMENT IS IMPORTANT?

9. First action of the JOIMAN group has been the definition of the processes in order to draft a comprehensive questionnaire for JP coordinators. • Processes have been refined after the submission of questionnaires and study visits. • This allowed us to draft a map which could be useful and adaptable to any Joint Programme for the planning of the management phase. THIRD MESSAGE: KNOW THE PROCESS AND THINK FIRST

10. Because most of the detected obstacles in the management of Joint Programmes are at Programme level and can be approached during the development/negotiation phase • Lack of information on the educational systems of the partners • Late involvement of key people • Confusion in terminology • Late definition of procedures for the administration of students • Duplication of quality assurance requirement, without a clear reflection on the harmonization of the existing – institutional – procedures with the needs of international dimension of the programme • Late discussion on calendars, credits, thesis procedures, certification, phd candidate supervision etc WHY IT IS IMPORTANT TO KNOW THE PROCESSES?

11. Transversal processes Students’ administration timeline F I N A N C I A L M A N A G E M E N T Q U A L I T Y A S S U R A N C E M E A S U R E S Application Promotion Receipt of application Quality in the application phase: transparency Selection round for non EU Selection Selection round for EU Quality of the selection Communication of results Sharing of the budget Admission Visa procedures Quality management tools Management and distribution of fees Enrolment Enrolment procedures Evaluation of teaching Welcoming services Management of scholarships Welcoming Language training Evaluation of services Cultural integration Teaching Reserves for sustainability Academic Tutoring Ex post evaluation: student’s career Preparation to the mobility Transfer of student’s’ career Accounting / reporting Mobility Tutoring of the mobility Welcoming services Ex – post evaluation: feedback from the labour market Cultural integration Academic Tutoring Transfer of students’ career Overall evaluation of the programme Dissertation Joint jury Diploma and DS Joint signature or request of multiple diplomas

13. Tangible outputs Good practice report on the management of JP (Master EU-non EU and Doctorates) Annexes: Cooperation agreement template, Glossary, example of guidelines, national legislations on tuition fees Thematic papers Contributions from international seminars JOIMAN web site: www.joiman.eu

16. Traditional way: Reading • (adapting concepts to different contexts, adapting tools such as the cooperation agreement template to our needs) • Innovative Way… HOW TO USE THE RESULTS