Upload
emil-jacobs
View
215
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Vrije Universiteit BrusselFilip Callewaert
Management of the Partnership
2
Overall objective
Management of the partnership and decision making boards
Promotion and visibility of the programme
Methodology for the management of mobility and student selection
3
1. Management of the partnership and decision making boards
4
The formation of the consortium
Egypt, Israel, Palestinian Territories (West-Bank and Gaza)
Palestinian U. : principles (Birzeit) But: a lot of candidates (TG1 – TG2)
Egyptian U.: problems with involvement of Israel Few candidates April 07: visit to Egyptian partners; discussion of proposal
5
Needs analysis
Egypt & Palestinian T.: starting-point = needs: Capacity building (faculty development
programmes) Introduction of new programmes More focused educational portfolio
Israel: // Erasmus LLP partner: any discipline mobility
6
EU partners
Existing relationships with 3rd country partnersFocus on traditional partners
UNICA network, EuropeAid partners etc.Answer to needs of 3rd country partners
7
=> Erasmus Mundus University II
8
Decision taking & Action
proposal eg. Institution’s Mobility Flow
9
Institution’s Mobility Flow
10
Worries: Mid June: surprise & concern
Time schedule General:
Degree-seeking students + 1-year programme Credit Transfer students needed to start in Sept/Oct 2007
Call/Application/Selection/Admission = 6 months > 1.5 months
Visa Application: 2 months
Particularities: Strikes in IL No electricity in Gaza Holidays everywhere (also embassies…)
11
Worries: Mid June: surprise & concern
Experimental character Credit transfer programmes Curriculum (in)compatibilities
Quality
12
Decision taking & Action
start call & preselection protocols: to be discussed
steering committee (but: holidays…) e-mail / phone calls / fax intranet
Pull / Push
importance of LIVE meetings absence of Palestinians (in all cases: Gaza)
13
Meetings
April 07: visit to Egyptian partners (TG1 and TG2)July: Rome meeting: representatives from IL, EG, EUAugust: visit to selection of IL, PA partnersSeptember: Brussels meeting with all partnersSeptember: Lille meeting with TG2 EGSeptember: Paris meeting with PA (P.E.A.C.E. meeting)November: visit to selection of EG partners (also TG2)December 07: visit to selection of EU partnersJanuary 08: Steering Committee meetingMarch 08: visit to selection of EU partnersApril 08: EG meeting (or Turkey)
14
Meetings
15
Decision taking & Action
importance of having the EMECW implementation situated in a clear institutional structure
International office or other central academic office Clear mandate towards executives Visible responsibility Support of institutional governors
16
Decision taking: Lessons learned
Do not overestimate Pull-technology Do not overestimate Electronic communication Have live meetings Institutional mandate for executives
17
2. Promotion and visibility of the programme
18
Promotion
As 75 % of mobility flow is TG 1: major responsibility at TG1 institutions TG2: “preferential” TG2-partners TG3: associate partners: GUPS, PEACE, …
No open national calls, but open institutional calls
19
Websites
Central: www.erasmusmundus2.eu
20
Websites: central
21
Websites: local; eg. www.ccast.edu.ps/emu2
22
Ad Valvas
23
Magazines
E.g. Local: American University Cairo:AUC Weekly
VUB: electronic newsletter
24
Promotion & visibility
Towards local programmes: Importance of ECTS information package!
Educational portfolio Mainly in case of credit transfer!
25
Promotion & visibility
Timing
26
3. Methodology for the management of mobility and student selection
27
Management software
The planned use of MoveOn / MoveIn failed- MoveOn : for the management of mobility- MoveIn: for the management of the application/selection process
Main reason: software not intended for consortia but only for one single institution and Unisolution could not manage to alter it in time
28
Management software
Registration/application module in our CMS website (Joomla based) www.erasmusmundus2.eu
Before 10 July, 148 people applied online for the first call (Ba/Ma level).
29
Management of mobility
an exchange server and ftp server was set up for mail and internal document management (eg. application workflow);
central databases were set up to manage, update and communicate scholarship availability and granting
E-banking software was introduced
30
Selection: BA/MA
Preselection by partners Impartial selection committee + procedure:
report! Ranking sent to HQ ; HQs dispatch
Final admission by hosting academics
Limited exceptional PRIORITY scheme allowed in framework of faculty building programmes
31
Selection BA/MA: TG1, 1st call: BA/MA
32
Selection BA/MA: transparancy & equal treatment
- Reporting- Number of candidates = 3x scholarships available
33
For instance, the Community College of Applied Science and Technology (CCAST, Gaza) appealed to the following criteria and weighting:
• Qualification General Grade (Excellent: 9 points / Very Good: 6 / Good: 4)
• Language (Qualification with the required level: 7 / Qualification below the required level: 4 / Without qualification but with excellent CCAST English test: 3 / Without qualification but with very good CCAST English test: 2 / Without qualification but with good CCAST English test: 1)
• Academic experience (1 point per year, maximally 9)• Motivation (maximally 5)
Selection BA/MA: CCAST
34
Selection: group mobility
- Selection done at home university
35
Selection: PhD
- Strategic use of scholarships: faculty development programmes (instructors as candidates)
- Recommendation letters- Final acceptance: by hosting academic
36
Selection: postdocs & academic staff
- strategically: they have a mission in the future of EMECW project, supported by institutional governors
- Faculty development programmes
37
Selection: TG2
- Cfr. TG1, with limited number of TG2 partners
38
Selection: TG3
- Palestinian refugees- Reside in EU- Recommended by home university
39
Conclusions: specific
- Management of partnership- Specific problems due to regional
compostion- Meet- EMECW in organisational structure of
institution
40
Conclusions: specific
- Promotion- Start in time- Programme still unknown; profit in future
from built up resonance now
41
Conclusions: specific
- Selection & management of mobility- Software?!
42
Conclusions: General
- Learning process; hope to be able to use the lessons learnt in the future
- ‘Of mice and men’: schemes do not always turn out as planned, in this case mainly due to tight time schedule