Draft February 2011
0. The NGO Empower European Universities as a fully independent organization has embarked on the establishment of a European monitoring system of EU country university policies to induce the policy changes necessary for improved university performance (see further page 20 of CHEPS et al, 2010 on the need for such a monitoring system).
European universities can perform (much) better if they are more and better empowered. They can be major contributors to resolving the crises of demography, of sustainability and the economy at large.
1.a. Our point of departure for a “grade” is that the higher the grade for the policy, the better the “performance” of the university system. This begs the performance question. Performance of universities is to be viewed within the international appreciation of universities, as expressed in rankings. In Ritzen (2010, p. 42, 43) we present a country ranking applied to the top 20, 100 and 200 universities respectively (the number of universities in a country among the top universities in the world divided by the population in that country). Presumably the country university policy is better the higher the country ranks.
1.b. A far more ambitions approach is to derive the “optimal” university policy (the A+ grade) from a criterion of the maximization of (sustainable) economic growth in combination with equality of opportunity. This requires a theoretical elaboration of an economic growth model with different types of human capital as was first presented by Ritzen (1976) as well as an empirical corroboration of its validity and the magnitude of the impact of the different parameters. In such a model the optimal university policy works out in the quality, quantity and diversity of the university graduates such that the economy reaches the highest possible level of economic growth.
2. Aghion et al (2007) and Ritzen (2010, p. 49) have analyzed the relation between policy variables and performance of universities as expressed in rankings. These studies allow for some generalization in terms of grading different policy elements. However, the largest part of the grading will be in our approach the result of “introspection” by experts, with the general notion that a higher grade “empowers” universities more.
3. The total grade is based on a number of subgrades for different categories of policy. In line with a number of reports (Estermann and Nokkala, 2009, Eurydice, 2008, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies et al, 2010, Sursock and Smidt, 2010) we distinguish the follow subsets of policy elements:
1 Legislation with respect to autonomy/independence
1.1 Are universities financially autonomous, so that they can borrow on the capital market?
1.2 Are universities autonomous in investments (in buildings, infrastructure)?
1.3 Are universities autonomous in wage setting?
1.4 – do – in hiring and firing?
1.5 Are accountability standards non-bureaucratic and non-excessive?
2 Legislation with respect to Governance
2.1 Do the universities have appointed university leadership?
2.2 Are appointments made by independent supervisors who represent external
stakeholders while not being politically determined?
2.3 Is the leadership fully in charge or legally constrained by the authority of other representative bodies (like councils, the senate etc.) in budget decisions?
2.4 – do – in decisions on hiring and firing, professional appointments, beyond the general practice in firms on worker involvement?
2.5 – do – in decisions on the organization of education and research?
3. Legislation with respect to education
3.1 Is the university free in choosing its own education approach?
3.2 Is the university free in choosing its own offerings of degree courses?
3.3. Is the university free to select students?
4. Government education financing structure
4.1 Does government financing agree with mission differentiation/mission strategy?
4.2 Do financing regulations allow for tuition fees to be set by the university in accordance with their education offer?
4.3 Does government financing contain incentives for quality?
5. Government university research financing structure
5.1 To what extent is research funding to universities competitive cq. does it contain incentives for quality?
5.2 To what extent is research financing related to national or international focus areas
6. Equality of opportunity
6.1 Can students borrow or get for free the costs of studies only to be repaid (if at all) if they have the resources (and limited to a maximum percentage of their income)?
7. Openness to foreign students
7.1 Are joint degrees with foreign universities allowed with limited transaction costs?
7.2 Are universities encouraged to teach also in other EU languages than their own?
7.3 Are some universities encouraged to support foreign students who do not know the national language?
8. Incentives to study abroad for national students
8.1 Do national students still receive the same financial public support when they study abroad as they would get at home?
9 Universities attitudes and drive
9.1 Do universities take the feedback from their alumni on education (degree) programs seriously into account?
9.2 Are universities seriously training for an international labor market?
9.3 Do universities abstain from ‘endogamy’ (hiring their own graduates?)
9.4 Is university leadership “co-working” or acting solely as top management of the organization?
4. The process for fine tuning and operationalization is as follows:
– The above list is sent around to all 27 correspondents of Empower European University network (in each country one) who reflect and hand in their proposals for additions and changes on the list of questions, as well as a provisional weight to each of the factors 1 – 9 (and the sub weights for all of the sub categories).
– After one iteration, the result will be discussed at a meeting in Maastricht.
References
- Aghion, P., M. Dewatrimont, C. Hoxby, S. Mas-Colell and A. Sapir, 2007, “Why reform Europe’s universities?”, Brueghel Policy Brief, Issue 2007/04.
- Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS) et al, 2010, “Progress in higher education reform across Europe”, Directorate General for Education and Culture of the European Commission.
- Eurydice, 2008, “Higher Education Governance in Europe: Policies, Structures, Funding and Academic Staff”, European Commission.
- Estermann, Thomas and Terhi Nokka, 2009, “University Autonomy in Europe”, Part 1, European University Association.
- Ritzen, Jo, 1976, “Education, Income Inequality and Economic Growth”, North Holland.
- Ritzen, Jo, 2010, “A Chance for European Universities”, Amsterdam University Press.
- Sursock, A. and H. Smidt, 2010, “A decade of change in European Higher Education”, European University Association.
