Next steps for advancing the staff mobility agenda Perspectives from MPPC

Transcription

1 Next steps for advancing the staff mobility agenda Perspectives from MPPC Elizabeth Colucci European University Association Mobilis in Mobili: Staff Mobility Workshop 4 June, Berlin

2 EUA: Overview Membership organisation of 850 universities and national rectors conferences in 47 countries Mission Position European universities in the centre of the European knowledge society Strengthen the leadership and management of universities Promote/support the internationalisation of universities within Europe and globally Emphasis: European added value: Positioning European Universities in the European and Global policy debate 2

3 EUA Membership: Diverse landscape, diverse needs

4 Mobility realities in Europe Has the EHEA increased mobility? Putting in place tools and structures for mobility does not correlate directly to its improvement/ growth Data continues to be an issue.(lack of comparable European data and definitions beyond programmes) Need to disaggregate different types of mobility and understand what each means strategically and in practice 4

5 MOBILITY - What are we talking about? Student credit mobility (short term) Structured/ Within the context of institutional partnerships Erasmus versus programme-independent B-M-(PhD) Incoming/outgoing Study v. internship/placement Student degree mobility B-M-PhD Free-mover/scholarship Incoming/outgoing Staff mobility Academic v. administrative Teaching v. research Short v. long Physical mobility 5

6 STAFF What are we talking about? Differentiations according to Functions: research, teaching, research and teaching, other functions (e.g. administration) Type of employer: in higher education institutions vs. in other institutions (research institutes, industry, etc.) Occupational groups: Scholars (academic staff, researchers, etc.) Managers and high-level administrators Associate professionals Other (e.g. clerical) staff Employment and work: permanently employed vs. fixedterm employed; full-time vs. part-time. Qualifications and career stages: doctoral candidates, doctoral holders, junior academic staff, etc; years of experience as researchers (early-stage to senior researchers)

7 ACADEMIC STAFF MOBILITY What are we talking about? Research mobility in university, institute or industry (often doesn t involve any classroom experience) Teaching mobility (often in formal European programmes; visiting lecturer on master and doctoral programmes; advisory, evaluation and assessment work; direct exchange) Cooperation projects (sharing best practice, development, capacity building, curricular cooperation, QA For organization of mobility Volunteer work (development cooperation) Training (language, teaching and learning ) Length of mobility: 2 days to full academic year or more line between short and longer term temporary (visits, exchanges, sabbaticals) vs. permanent 7

8 What we do know about mobility: current regional data sources UOE (UNESCO/OECD/Eurostat) (degree holders, incl. PhDs - national sources) Erasmus and Marie Curie programme data (student, staff and researcher short term mobility) ACA EURODATA study (2006) and follow-up 2011 (piecing together existing data sources to lend a picture of European mobility + data critique) EUROSTUDENT (Students- social dimension of mobility) ERAWATCH/MORE report (Researchers within HEIs/Research institutes/industry, etc) Bologna Implementation Report (Students- based on existing sources/surveys of national governments) EU Mobility Scorecard (Students- national policies and conditions) 8

9 Is staff mobility an after-thought? Lip-service but few concrete initiatives, benchmarks or objectives Ex) Lithuanian benchmark (10%) Rarely receives funding from national or regional sources, compared to student mobility Erasmus dependency? Attracting international staff: high on the agenda Last on the list of priorities in terms of data capture (too complicated) Have we made progress on the political agenda (EHEA)? 9

10 Source: EUA Internationalisation Survey 2013

11

12 MAUNIMO: Mapping University Mobility of Students and Staff 2 year pilot ( ) LLP co-funded Partners EUA (coordinator) University of Swansea University of Oslo University of Trento Philips University Marburg + 30 pilot universities 12

13 MAUNIMO key questions What is the role of institutions in meeting national and European mobility targets? To what extent do institutions formulate their own goals regarding mobility and how do they relate to other institutional strategies (teaching, research, internationalisation)? How do institutions collect data on mobility and why? Does this data collection support their strategic interests? How can institutions better support and influence policy agendas regarding mobility? 13

14 Mobility Mapping Tool (MMT) Designed as a mobility-strategy self-assessment ( mobility audit ) Involving/surveying different actors in the institution with different stakes and roles in mobility Intended to examine the state of play regarding the perception and management of all types of mobility... And match institutional strategies with data collection/information gathering- Are they mutually reinforcing?

15 Pilot evaluation: some observations Some institutions took it up as part of their internationalisation strategy review Others as part of their internal QA Most agreed that it helped to raise awareness regarding the complexity of mobility And used it to launch strategic discussions Many learned something about how the international office is percieved and internal communication Many found a lack of awareness regarding institutional strategies 15

16 Some results: Importance of mobility 16

17 17

18 Is it a strategic priority to enhance (both in number and quality) mobility for the following groups...?

19 Mobility strategies Discontinuity between the aspirations and strategies: In general, low awareness for institutional strategy Low awareness of benchmarks and measurement of strategies The discussion on mobility has taken place mostly at the institutional or faculty level focusing primarily on Bachelor and Master level short term mobility. Doctorate candidates and academics not the number one target group in internationalisation or mobility strategies. 19

20 MAUNIMO Recommendations National strategies should respect diversity of institutional needs and resources Institutional mobility strategy development should be a clear priority/ institutional leadership Integrated data collection systems must underpin these strategies Quantitative targets should not mask the need to look at the qualitative dimensions of mobility Recognition procedures and mobility activities need to be taken up by internal QA 20

21 Mobility-Policy Practice Connect Connecting the dialogue between institutions and government Enhance and promote national strategies Three country workshops (March-May 2014): Outgoing student and staff mobility (France) Attracting international students/staff (Lithuania) Taking stock of mobility programmes and thair impact (Hungary) Focus groups Institutional site visits Policy brief (September 2014) 21

22 Short term: Staff mobility obstacles Lack of recognition/incentivisation of teaching period abroad Language barriers High competition for available funding Administrative complications Syndrome of the usual suspects (Erasmus)/diversifying beneficiaries Pockets of good practice/partnerships stay hidden at faculty/department level Long term (non-permenant) Legislative inflexibility with regards to sabbaticals/ contractual insecurity Lack of incentivation/career development prospects Family barriers Visa/work permit restrictions 22

23 23

24 Some solutions: Admin staff Admin staff mobility as a distinct part of international strategy: benchmarks Embedding admin staff mobility exchanges in strategic partnerships Group trainings abroad/ summer schools Not admin staff mobility, but rather professional training and career development Part of institutional language training policy 24

25 Some solutions: Academic staff Incentivisation (institutional level): a vehicule for networking and career development Incentivisation (national level): Staff mobility to be included in university contract with ministry where relevant (France, Italy, for example) Staff mobility as part of the internationalisation strategy (structural vs. individual impact) benchmarks/ Impact assessment Reciprocity: Embedding staff mobility in strategic partnerships (Paris 1) Staff ownership of student mobility programmes

26 The problematic issue of data: Institutions What are we measuring and for what purpose? Length? Fit for purpose? Multiple periods abroad as part of one teaching agreement? Quality? Setting institutional benchmarks? How? Data reporting versus staff/faculty autonomy (self-reporting) Coordinating centralised and decentralised reporting Coordinating different databases outgoing vs incoming staff mobility (few have info on incoming) lack of system integration 26

27 Institutional Data: Some creative practice Erasmus University Rotterdam Conference attendance Is there a difference between Dutch and international staff? University of Oslo Staff mobility database (only for outgoing, more than 1 week) Self-reporting* Incentivisation through travel insurance claims But misses travel funded by devolved faculties Vilnius Gediminas Technical Mandatory absense request- centralized University of Bordeaux (Segalen) Working group on data management for staff mobility Need to look not just at what data these institutions are capturing but also how they are using it* 27

28 The problematic issue of data: European level Common definition of the population needed (i.e. who should be included as academic staff, researchers, etc.?) relevant sub-divisions (e.g. sectors of employment and career stages) and functions of mobility (e.g. short-term visits, mobility periods for research and teaching, migration, etc.) Four different types of data collection will be necessary a new comprehensive statistical information system on currently mobile scholars an improvement of available educational statistics on doctoral awards a reporting system on visits, exchanges and sabbaticals to be newly established with the help of data gathered by HEI and research institutions; surveys retrospectively identifying international academic mobility in the course of major career stages or the career as a whole. Source: ACA Mapping Mobility Study: 2011

29 Next steps at the European level? We need data (of course) but be careful Definition of staff mobility and data parameters should come, to some extent, bottom-up And connect the institutional research and teaching agendas Ministerial committment also needed (Top-down) Continual refinement of national mobility strategies and benchmarks Staff mobility incentivisation (structural reforms...) Need a stratified approach to distinct types of mobility (short v long term v admin) different policy responses for each Staff mobility should be a distinct priority, not and afterthought or an add-on 29

30 30