Partnerships and Internationalization Measures from a data-driven perspective Britta Piel Freie Universität Berlin Center for International Cooperation
WHO WE ARE 2
Who We Are one of Germany s 11 Universities of Excellence founded in 1948, with strong international orientation 32,000 students, app. 500 professors 66 bachelor s, 110 master s, 23 structured doctoral programs 11 Departments plus Charité University Medicine Berlin (joint faculty with the Humboldt- Universität zu Berlin) 3
International Network University Excellence Initiative: established in 2007, renewed in 2012, up to 2017 to make efficient use of networks & focus on mutual benefits of partnerships key measures: liaison offices, strategic partnerships, seed funds seven liaison offices set up in between 2005 and 2010 4
Strategic Focus on Internationalization St Petersburg University University of British Columbia Hebrew University of Jerusalem Peking University 5 Part of FUB s International Network University Strategy Liaison Offices Strategic Partnerships Strategic Unit: Center for International Cooperation Funding for internationalization measures
Internationalization at Freie Universität Guiding Principle Internationalization is a basic orientation guiding all activities in teaching and research and a tool to further advance the university s performance and academic excellence. Specific Goals recruit and retain excellent students as well as promising researchers, university teachers from abroad foster international mobility of all university members develop innovative programs and projects make efficient use of networks and cooperations focus on selected, mutually beneficial partnerships 6
International students & staff Currently from abroad: 8 % of the students in bachelor s programs 17 % of the students in master s programs 31 % of the doctoral candidates 10 % of the professors In Germany the first choice for fellows of the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, no. one for Erasmus students, no. one for DAAD scholars More than 100 partnerships with universities around the world in 67 countries plus about 340 agreements within the European exchange programs 7
WHY LOOK AT DATA? 8
9
Different words, different rationales assess: see what you have done benchmark: see where you stand evaluate: see whether you have reached your goals profile: see where you might be going Goals to be accountable to leadership, funding agencies to foster (internal) transparency to optimize strategic planning to become more effective 10
(STRATEGIC) PARTNERSHIPS 11
Global Trend Strategic Partnerships are increasingly discussed and developed among universities worldwide in Germany, introduction of new funding opportunities specifically for strategic partnerships (i.e. DAAD Program Strategic Partnerships and Strategic Networks ) not much research on SPs in higher education: International survey and report on strategic partnerships by Institute of International Education and Freie Universität Berlin (Report in IIE/DAAD Global Perspectives on Strategic International Partnerships, 2016) The EAIE Barometer: International Strategic Partnerships 12
Survey on International Strategic Partnerships online-survey conducted in early 2015 by IIE/FUB initially 258 participating institutions 91 qualified to complete entire questionnaire persons in charge of SPs at institutions that have established SPs and that differentiate between SPs and non-sps North America (28), Latin America (9), Africa and Middle East (3), Asia (4), Australasia (13), Europe (34) 13
Goals Has your institution developed ways/means to evaluate the strategic partnership, its benefits and effectiveness? 5% 36% 40% Yes No Not yet, but we plan to I don't know 19% 14
Partner Selection SP are mostly developed out of existing partnerships Majority (65%) developed their SPs through a consultation process, incl. top-down as well as bottom-up elements (vs 16% purely top-down) A variety of indicators used to identify strategic partnerships: Highest rated factors for identifying SPs: potential for further development specific research strengths of partner institution compatibility of academic profiles degree of interest among faculty pre-existing formal relations Lowest rated factors for identifying SPs: personal preferences of institution s leaders international rankings political reasons/national priorities history of previous cooperation (joint research, publications etc) 15
Strategic Partnerships Means to an end, not an end in itself Objectives: deliver additional quality & opportunities for research and teaching deliver complementary strengths promote sustainable research cooperation provide attractive options for students, early-career researchers and established faculty increase international co-publications increase FUB s visibility in specific regions and globally Question: Which partners and in which regions are the right ones? Answer: Identify particularly synergetic partnerships in particular regions. 16
Identification Process Top-down focus on regions/countries with high and/or growing research potential SPs must mirror faculties research interest partnerships should have a history of collaboration at min. 3 departments availability of funding opportunities should be taken into consideration process managed by a central unit (Center for International Cooperation) 17
Identification Process Bottom-up Target Agreements: Departments map their international activities and develop their own internationalisation agendas Consultation process with Deans Analysis of existing partnerships (level of activity, mobility, etc) Analysis of third party funded research projects (FUB database) Analysis of research output (co-publications), where data available Analysis of incoming guest scholars / fellows 18
Current Strategic Partnerships First phase non-eu/overseas: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem (since 2011) Peking University (since 2011) St. Petersburg State University (since 2012) University of British Columbia (since 2014) University of California at Berkeley (since Sept 2016) Second phase: stronger focus on Europe: Next: University of Zurich (agreement in development) And consultations with 2 more potential strategic partner universities 19
Example: Bilateral FUB HUJI Current joint activities involving approx. 100 researchers from FUB und HUJI Joint research projects / joint publications Joint Seed Money Fund Joint PhD agreement Joint PostDoc Fellowships Joint PhD Program Human Rights Under Pressure Joint annual PhD workshops Joint initiative in online education Student exchange Faculty mobility Erasmus+ Regular consultations between university leadership Administrative staff exchange Joint press releases / marketing Joint fundraising 20
Example: Multilateral & thematically focused University Alliance for Sustainability promote joint research and teaching on sustainability related issues foster dialogue and inter-institutional learning with regard to sustainable campus management Principles of Cultural Dynamics Strategic research network focusing on the topic of Principles of Cultural Dynamics Combines expertise of leading humanities institutes/centers 21
Some observations mapping process first start, but possibly never comprehensive data sometimes surprising good tool to develop, end, or focus partnerships updates can be used for monitoring no evaluation mechanism informed strategic planning 22
LIAISON OFFICES 23
Global Network of Liaison Offices 24
Main tasks increase global visibility and reach through marketing and advising recruit promising talent support existing partnerships and exchanges develop new research cooperation support FUB researchers and events build local alumni networks 25
Why evaluate? Formal reasons: accountability to funding agency evidence-base for discussions about the network s future after 2017 Content reasons: improving internationalisation through monitoring of activities, procedures, and performances providing new impulses for future work identification of new goals understanding our partners needs 26
Structure of the evaluation Step 1: Collecting information liaison offices self reports, supported by interviews with liaison offices heads, where necessary online questionnaire among FUB professors online questionnaire among local partners official university statistics on personnel, students, and funding Step 2: Giving recommendations external evaluation commission composed of international experts (e.g. German Rectors Conference, ACA, MPG, AvH ) meeting in January 2016 with FUB s Executive Board Step 3: Decisions 27
A few sample topics & questions self reports: What does your daily work look like? What s the system in the country you work in? online questionnaire among FUB professors: Which services have you used, and how would you rate them? What s important to you in internationalization? online questionnaire among local partners: How important are the offices for your work? How could cooperation with FUB be improved? official university statistics: Have # of PhD students changed? 28
Example: Recruitment of PhD Students 29
Select results measurable internationalization effects through the offices concept of liaison offices strengthens the institutional strategy of International Network University very diverse picture depending on the country and its politics very diffentiated usage by different user groups / subject areas with a strong overall usage and satisfaction rate high satisfaction rate among German and international partners in high accordance with the university s profile and mission continue with differentiated sets of goals and tasks 30
Lessons Learned define your objectives carefully: know what you want to learn when assessing / evaluating / mapping find suitable and manageable ways of measuring don t measure things just because you can have a plan on what you want to do with the results keep things on par with your resources 31
Thank you for your attention! Contact: britta.piel@fu-berlin.de 32