Enhancing Education Quality: The Connected University Approach

1. Presentation of EQ11 Advisory Group May 6 2011

2. 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

3. Our Instructions • Not an evaluation • Help to advise the University on enhancement of education quality • Be clear, short and usable

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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

7. Lund a “connected university” • Connected to: • Society • Students • Faculties and departments • International • Roots and history as well as future

8. 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.

9. 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

10. 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

11. 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

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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

15. 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

16. 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

17. 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