ERASMUS MUNDUS ( ) OHJELMA

Transkriptio

1 ERASMUS MUNDUS ( ) OHJELMA KANSALLINEN AVAUSSEMINAARI Aika: Paikka: Monitoimisali (1. krs.), Kansainvälisen liikkuvuuden ja yhteistyön keskus CIMO Osoite: Hakaniemenranta 6, Helsinki Puheenjohtajana toimii Juha Ketolainen, CIMO Ohjelma Avaus ja tervetulotoivotus KIRSTI AALTONEN Johtaja (vt.), Kansainvälisen liikkuvuuden ja yhteistyön keskus CIMO Korkeakoulureformi ja kansainvälistyminen ANITA LEHIKOINEN Opetusministeriö New Erasmus Mundus Programme ( ) WILLIAM AITCHISON European Commission, Directorate-General Education, Audiovisual and Culture Keskustelua Kahvitarjoilu Suomen osallistuminen Erasmus Mundukseen PÄIVI PIHLAJA Ohjelma-asiantuntija, CIMO Erasmus Mundus - a student perspective ERIC HALBACH PhD Student, Helsinki University of Technology / SpaceMaster graduate Korkeakoulunäkökulma Erasmus Mundus ohjelmaan JUSSI PARKKINEN Vararehtori, Joensuun yliopisto Keskustelua Lounasbuffet

2 YHTEISOHJELMIEN TOTEUTUS Neuvontatilaisuus kevään 2009 hakukierroksesta (Toimi 1: yhteiset maisterikurssit ja tohtoriohjelmat) Aika: klo Paikka: Monitoimisali, Hakaniemenranta 6 Puheenjohtaja: Maija Airas-Hyödynmaa, CIMO Ohjelma Selvitys englanninkielisestä tutkinto-opetuksesta Suomessa IRMA GARAM Vastaava asiantuntija, CIMO Erasmus Mundus maisteriohjelman koordinointi EIJA KUJANPÄÄ Koordinaattori, NordSecMob, Teknillinen korkeakoulu PAULIINA KARVINEN MSc in European Forestry, Joensuun Yliopisto Keskustelua Kahvitarjoilu Erasmus Mundus maisteriohjelmien itsearviointi 2008 KARL HOLM Suunnittelija, Korkeakoulujen arviointineuvosto Nordic Master Programme NORA RIDGEWELL Vastaava asiantuntija, CIMO Keskustelua ERASMUS MUNDUS HAKUKLINIKKA - ACTION 1 -HANKEHAKU, KEVÄT Consultation based on Programme Guide and Action 1 Application Form WILLIAM AITCHISON & PÄIVI PIHLAJA

3 Erasmus Mundus ( ) William Aitchison DG Education and Culture European Commission

4 Erasmus Mundus ( ) 1. The European context 2. Objectives of the new programme 3. Main characteristics of the programme 4. Benefits and impact on universities 5. Benefits and impact on students and academics 2

5 Erasmus Mundus ( ) 1. The European context (internal policy) Lisbon Strategy ( ) Education & Training 2010 work programme Bologna Process Commission Communications: An updated strategic framework for European co-operation in education and training (2008) Delivering on the Modernisation Agenda for Universities (2006) Mobilising the Brainpower of Europe (2005) 3

6 Erasmus Mundus ( ) 1. The European context (external relations) The EU recognises the importance of higher education for economic and social development as: contributing to the development of human capital a key element in promoting democracy, stability and peaceful relations among nations Higher education plays a crucial role in: producing high quality human resources disseminating scientific discovery and advanced knowledge through teaching educating future generations of citizens, high-level professionals and political leaders, who can contribute to better governance 4

7 Erasmus Mundus ( ) 1. The European context (rationalisation of programmes) Tempus ICI co-operation Erasmus Mundus I Alfa Asia Link Alβan Edulink EM External Cooperation Window Erasmus Mundus II 5

8 Erasmus Mundus ( ) 2. Objectives of the new programme In the political context of Bologna and Lisbon the programme identifies three aims: (i) promoting European Higher Education (ii) improving the career prospects of students (iii) promoting intercultural understanding through academic co-operation 6

9 Erasmus Mundus ( ) 2. Objectives of the new programme Common objectives Enhance capacity for international co-operation Enrich the educational and cultural environment Develop (through mobility) well-qualified, open-minded and internationally experienced young academics/professionals capable of meeting the challenges of the global economy Improve transparency and recognition of studies and qualifications 7

10 Erasmus Mundus ( ) 2. Objectives of the new programme Specific objectives (internal) Promote structured co-operation between HEIs Offer high-quality education with a distinct European added value - transnational dimension, course integration (curriculum development, common selection, admission and examination procedures/delivery of degrees), intra-eu mobility, quality assurance Support mutual enrichment by developing individuals qualifications Improve accessibility and enhance the profile, visibility and attractiveness of European Higher Education in the world 8

11 Erasmus Mundus ( ) 2. Objectives of the new programme Specific objectives (external) Enhance the skills and qualifications of Higher Education staff, thereby contributing to the improvement of HE systems in third countries Enhance political, cultural, educational and economic links between the EU and third countries Provide students from vulnerable groups with further education and career development, empowering them for leadership Implement Common Areas of Higher Education 9

12 Erasmus Mundus ( ) 3. Main characteristics of the programme Foundations - Erasmus Mundus ( ) 103 Erasmus Mundus Masters Courses 7000 grants to third-country students/academics 50 partnerships with third-country HEIs 1500 grants to European students/academics 52 projects to enhance the attractiveness of European HE 10

13 Erasmus Mundus ( ) Number of Masters Courses Number of Academics Number of Students Number of Windows scholarships

14 Erasmus Mundus ( ) 3. Main characteristics of the programme Foundations - EM External Cooperation Window ( ) 286 EU HEIs 315 third-country HEIs 5735 grants to third-country students/academics 1290 grants to European students/academics 12

15 Erasmus Mundus ( ) 3. Main characteristics of the programme Building on experience Interim evaluation of Erasmus Mundus ( ) Impact assessment and public online consultation of stakeholders Meetings with programme participants (students, HEIs, national authorities) Unanimous message: the programme is a success and should be continued Relevance to identified needs Impact on national legislations (joint degrees, visa policies) Impact on attractiveness of EU Higher Education Need for better balance between non-eu and EU students Decentralised management of scholarships by consortia and partnerships 13

16 Erasmus Mundus ( ) 3. Main characteristics of the programme Broadening the scope Integrating the External Cooperation Window Introducing joint doctoral programmes Offering full-study scholarships to European students/doctoral candidates Including third-country HEIs as full actors in the design and implementation of joint programmes Reinforcing the role of other socio-economic actors (research centres, noneducational organisations, etc.) in implementation of joint programmes Providing information grants to Erasmus Mundus National Structures 14

17 Erasmus Mundus ( ) 3. Main characteristics of the programme Combining excellence and co-operation Excellence will be reinforced with an increased focus on: Specially designed joint programmes at postgraduate level Quality Assurance Services offered to international students Tighter links with the socio-economic sectors International co-operation will be reinforced with an increased focus on: Closer links between European and third-country HEIs Mobility of students/academics between European and third-country HEIs 15

18 Erasmus Mundus ( ) 3. Main characteristics of the programme Action 1 - Joint Programmes (including scholarships) Action 2 - Partnerships (including scholarships) Action 3 - Promotion of European Higher Education 16

19 Erasmus Mundus ( ) 3. Main characteristics of the programme Action 1 - Joint Programmes (including scholarships) Erasmus Mundus Joint Masters Courses Erasmus Mundus Joint Doctoral Programmes Full-study scholarships for non-eu and EU students and academics 17

20 Erasmus Mundus ( ) 3. Main characteristics of the programme Action 2 - Partnerships (including scholarships) Large partnerships between higher education institutions in EU and third countries in a specific region Third countries concerned are those covered by the external co-operation instruments Erasmus-style co-operation mechanisms, transfer of know-how Definition of priorities according to the needs of third countries involved 18

21 Erasmus Mundus ( ) 3. Main characteristics of the programme Action 2 - Partnerships (including scholarships) Scholarships of varying length (3 months to 3 years) Scholarships for bachelor, master, doctorate and post-doctorate students and HE staff (training, teaching, research activities) Mobility not linked to specific programmes (all programmes on offer in partnerships can be followed) Special attention paid to socio-economically disadvantaged groups and populations in a vulnerable situation 19

22 Erasmus Mundus ( ) 3. Main characteristics of the programme Action 3 - Promotion of European Higher Education Promotion projects and clustering activities Information grants for Erasmus Mundus National Structures Erasmus Mundus Students and Alumni Association (EMA) Studies 20

23 Erasmus Mundus ( ) 3. Main characteristics of the programme Budget Easy absorption of budget in first phase of Erasmus Mundus ( 230m for core programme + 70m for Windows) Erasmus Mundus ( ): 493m for Actions 1 and 3 460m for Action 2 21

24 Erasmus Mundus ( ) 4. Impact on and benefits for universities Establishing long-lasting links and relationships between institutions Enhancing the quality of teaching and students Putting in place mechanisms that contribute to making mobility and degree recognition easier Enhancing university visibility and attractiveness worldwide Erasmus Mundus label - reputation of offering and being involved in excellence programmes Enhancing the Bologna Process and publicising it around the world 22

25 Erasmus Mundus ( ) 5. Impact on and benefits for students and academics Participating in high-level masters/doctoral programmes Receiving double/multiple/joint degree from a consortium of universities Acquiring in-depth knowledge of Europe and its HE system(s) Improving linguistic skills and experiencing an intercultural dimension Improving the employability of students through recognition of qualifications and study periods abroad Academic exchange of knowledge, ideas, contacts 23

26 Erasmus Mundus ( ) Expected outputs - some target figures for Action EM Masters Courses 35 EM Joint Doctorates 5300 grants to third-country students at masters level 450 grants to third-country students at doctoral level 3500 grants to EU students at masters level 330 grants to EU students at doctoral level 2000 grants to third-country academics at masters level 2000 grants to EU academics at masters level 24

27 Erasmus Mundus ( ) Ex-post evaluation of Erasmus Mundus ( ) Will examine efficiency, effectiveness, relevance and sustainability of the programme Timetable: December 2008 to August 2009 Commission will report by end of 2009 with recommendations 25

28 Erasmus Mundus ( ) Useful links General info - EM Student and Alumni Association - Study in Europe

29 Suomen osallistuminen Erasmus Mundus ohjelmaan Päivi Pihlaja, CIMO 2/2009

30 Suomalaiset hankehakemukset Action 1 yhteiset maisteriohjelmat % (n= 103) Yhteensä Partnerina Koordinaattoina % (n= 23) Yhteensä Partnerina Koordinaattoina % Yhteensä (n= 23) Partnerina Koordinaattoina % (n= 21) Yhteensä Partnerina Koordinaattoina % Yhteensä (n= 17) Partnerina Koordinaattoina % (n= 19) Yhteensä Partnerina Koordinaattoina ,8 4 % ,7 % ,7 % ,5 % 2/2009 Haetut ,1 % ,1 % ,4 % ,0 % ,8 % 1-1 1,1 % Hyväksytty ,4 % ,3 % Lähde: Joachim Fronia, Quantitive results achieved under Erasmus Mundus Erasmus Mundus Coordinator s meeting, February 2009

31 Suomalaisväritteiset EM-maisteriohjelmat 11 Erasmus Mundus maisteriohjelmaa (Suomessa koordinoituja: 2) Master of Science in European Forestry, Joensuun yliopisto, koordinaattori European Masters Clinical Linguistics, Joensuun yliopisto, partneri European Master in Higher Education, Tampereen yliopisto, partneri SpaceMaster - Joint European Master in Space Science and Technology, Teknillinen korkeakoulu, partneri NordSecMob - Masters Programme in Security and Mobile Computing, Teknillinen korkeakoulu, koordinaattori International Master in Management of Information Technology, IMMIT, Turun kauppakorkeakoulu, partneri International Masters in Economy, State and Society, IMESS, Helsingin yliopisto, partneri ASC - Master of Science: Advanced Spectroscopy in Chemistry, Helsingin yliopisto, partneri CIMET - Color Informatics and Media Technology, Joensuun yliopisto, partneri MAIPR: Master of Arts in International Performance Research, Tampereen yliopisto, partneri EMMEP - Erasmus Mundus Minerals and Environmental Programme, Teknillinen korkeakoulu, partneri 2/2009

32 2004 MSc EF Master of Science in European Forestry COORDINATOR FI - University of Joensuu PARTNERS SE - Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences ES - University of Lleida NL - University of Wageningen AU - BOKU University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences DE - Albert-Ludwigs-University Freiburg EMCL European Masters Clinical Linguistics COORDINATOR DE - Potsdam University PARTNERS FI - University of Joensuu IT - University of Milano Bicocca NL - University of Groningen European Masters Degree in Higher Education COORDINATOR NO - University of Oslo PARTNERS FI - University of Tampere PT - University of Aveiro 2005 Spacemaster - Joint European Master in Space Science and Technology COORDINATOR SE - Lulea University of Technology PARTNERS UK - Cranfield University CZ - Czech Technical University in Prague FI - Helsinki University of Technology DE - Bavarian Julius-Maximilians University of Wurzburg FR - University of Toulouse 3 Paul Sabatier 2/2009

33 2006 NordSecMob - Master's Programme in Security and Mobile Computing COORDINATOR FI - Helsinki University of Technology PARTNERS SE - Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm NO - Norwegian University of Science and Technology DK - Technical University of Denmark EE - University of Tartu 2007 IMMIT: International Master in Management of Information Technology COORDINATOR NL - Stichting Katholieke Universiteit Brabant PARTNERS FI - Turun kauppakorkeakoulu FR - Université Paul Cezanne Aix-Marseille III IMESS: International Masters in Economy, State and Science COORDINATOR UK - University College London PARTNERS CZ - Univerzita Karlova v Praze EE - University of Tartu FI - University of Helsinki HU - Budapesti Corvinus Egyetem PL - Uniwersytet Jagiellonski 2/2009

34 2008 ASC - Master of Science: Advanced Spectroscopy in Chemistry COORDINATOR FR - University of Sciences and technologies of Lille PARTNERS IT - Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna ES - University Complutense of Madrid DE - University of Leipzig NO - University of Bergen FI - University of Helsinki PL - Jagiellonian University of Karkow CIMET - Color in Informatics and Media Technology COORDINATOR FR - University Jean Monnet of Saint Etienne, PARTNERS FI - University of Joensuu NO - Gjøvik University College ES - University of Granada MAIPR: Master of Arts in International Performance Research COORDINATOR UK - University of Warwick PARTNERS NL - University of Amsterdam FI - University of Tampere EMMEP - Erasmus Mundus Minerals and Environmental Programme COORDINATOR NL - Delft University of Technology PARTNERS FI - Helsinki University of Technology University of Miskolc PL - Wrocław University of Technology DE - Rwth Aachen University UK - University of Exeter 2/2009

35 Suomalaiset hankehakemukset Action 3: Kumppanuudet (Partnerships) Yhteensä (yht. 47) % Yhteensä (n=17) Partnerina Koordinaattoina % Yhteensä (n=11) Partnerina Koordinaattoina % Yhteensä (n=10) Partnerina Koordinaattoina % (n= 9) Yhteensä Partnerina Koordinaattoina Haetut ,1 % ,8 % ,7 % ,7% 8 Hyväksytty ,1 % 1-1 2,0 % ,0 % ,2 % 4 International Network for Higher Education Studies INHES (TaY): Australia, Japani MSc European Forestry (JoY): Brasilia, Etelä-Afrikka, Kiina SpaceMaster Global Partnership (TKK): Kiina, USA, Japani, Kanada HEEM European Masters Degree in Higher Education (TaY): Australia, Japani 2/2009

36 Suomalaiset hankehakemukset Action 4: Markkinointihankkeet (Enhancing attractiveness) % (n= 54) Yhteensä Partnerina Koordinaattoina % Yhteensä Partnerina Koordinaattoina % Yhteensä Partnerina Koordinaattoina % Yhteensä Partnerina Koordinaattoina % Yhteensä Partnerina Koordinaattoina % Yhteensä Partnerina Koordinaattoina ,5 % ,5 % ,3 % 18 4,6 % 2/2009 Haetut ,2 % ,2 % , ,2 % , ,7 % ,4 % Hyväksytyt ,7 % Suomalaiset koordinaattorit ja partnerit yhteenlaskettuna Suomi ollut prosentuaalisesti 5. aktiivisin (3,2 %; Edellä Espanja, Ranska, Belgia, UK)

37 Suomalaisten hankkeiden itsearviointi 2008 CIMO, KKA ja Higher Education Group 4 maisteriohjelmaa osallistui Suosituksia ja hyviä käytänteitä 2/2009

38 Lisätietoa Päivi Pihlaja Ohjelma-asiantuntija, CIMO /2009

39 Korkeakoulunäkökulma Erasmus Mundus ohjelmaan Jussi Parkkinen vararehtori, Joensuun yliopisto Kansallinen Erasmus Mundus seminaari CIMO Helsinki

40 University of Joensuu

41 Strengths of the University of Joensuu 1. Education and Human Development 2. Forests and the Environment 3. Optics, New Materials, and Information Technology 4. Border Studies and Russia

42 Key statistics in 2008 Applicants 5,913 New students 1,330 Students in degree programmes 7,837 Staff (full-time equivalent) 1,083 Master s degrees 1,272 Doctor s degrees 58 Budget funding (million euro) 63.0 External funding (million euro) 21.0

43 International Programs Three Erasmus Mundus programs Forestry (coordination), Color, Linguistics Five other International MSc programs Forestry (CBU), Computer Science (CBU+other), Cultural Diversity, Human Geography Five non degree programs in English Educational Science; Environmental Science; Karelia, Russia, and Baltic Area; Law; Social Science

44 Coordinates National Grad Schools Cultural Interpretations Computer Science & Technology Environmental Science and Technology Forest Sciences Inorganic Materials Chemistry Language Studies Modern Optics and Photonics Russia in Europe

45 ASIA NETWORK FIRST NORTH-SOUTH-SOUTH NORDPLUS ERASMUS ERASMUS MUNDUS TEMPUS EU-CANADA ISEP ASLA-Fulbright Campus Europeae

46 Student mobility in 2008 Incoming foreign students 603 Degree students 344 Exchange students 259 Students studying abroad 210

47

48 Erasmus Mundus Students University of Joensuu Year International Erasmus Mundus Students Students % % % % % %

49 Erasmus Mundus Students in European Forestry Countries with MSc EF students

50 Erasmus Mundus Students in European Forestry Europe 19 % Africa 15 % L. America 9 % Australia 1 % N. America 1 % Asia 55 %

51 Erasmus Mundus Global Partnership for Master of Science in European Forestry South Africa, Brasil, China Erasmus Mundus Action 4 projects AMEU: Agriculture and Related Sciences (Forestry) TEA TEAM: Western Balkanese and Central Asian countries (Admnistration) EACOVIROE: Asia (Computer Science & Physics) LEANES: Asia (Environmental Sciences)

52 Influence of Erasmus Mundus

53 Benefits of Erasmus Mundus University of Joensuu 25 % increase in foreign degree students Considerable increase in Asian students ~ 70 % increase in external funding from the EU educational cooperation programmes e.g. in 2008 Erasmus Mundus programme EUR ,41 EU educational total in UJo EUR ,95

54 Benefits from the Erasmus Mundus Action 4 projects Excellent new networks for marketing in Western Balkanese and Central Asian countries New subject-specific channels for the marketing of Forestry programmes Enhanced visibility of the University of Joensuu in third countries and in Europe

55 Challenges of Erasmus Mundus Many different cultural background Finding student dormitory in mobility phase Visa problems inside Europe Study cultures different Effective introductory week and tutoring Language studies

56 Confusing points Confusion with tuition fees Joint degree and University law PhD requirements

57 Englanninkieliset tutkinto-ohjelmat suomalaisissa korkeakouluissa Erasmus Mundus -seminaari Irma Garam Tieto, neuvonta ja tutkimus CIMO 2/2009

58 Selvitys englanninkielisistä tutkinto-ohjelmista Taustaa: Kansainväliset koulutusmarkkinat, eurooppalainen ja suomalainen korkeakoulupolitiikka, ulkomaisten opiskelijoiden kokemukset opiskelusta Suomessa. Tavoite: Yleiskuva englanninkielisistä tutkinnoista suomalaisissa korkeakouluissa Tarjonnan näkökulma: Kehittämisen lähtökohdat, työelämäyhteydet, opetus ja palvelut, laatu, opiskelijat ja opiskelijarekrytointi Toteutus: Kysely Bachelor ja Master s tason ohjelmille: 158 vastausta (254 Study in Finland tietokannassa) Ohjelmavastaavien haastattelu (7 ohjelmaa) Korkeakoulujen strategioiden tarkastelu Ohjausryhmä: OPM, TEM, KKA, yliopistot, ammattikorkeakoulut, opiskelijajärjestöt, EK, Siirtolaisuusinstituutti, rekrytointipalvelut 2/2009

59 Englanninkielisten tutkintojen tarjonta lukuina Study in Finland tietokanta, tilanne kesällä 2008 Yhteensä 275 tutkintoon johtavaa ohjelmaa, Master s tasolla 62%, Bachelor 30% Eurooppalaisessa vertailussa Suomessa runsaasti Bachelorohjelmia Kolme koulutusalaa dominoi: Kaupallinen ala, tekniikka ja IT yhteensä 55% Eurooppalaisessa vertailussa Suomessa vähän yhteiskuntatieteen ohjelmia (Euroopassa keskimäärin 21%, Suomessa 4%) 2/2009

60 Tutkinto-ohjelmien yhteistyöjärjestelyt Lähes puolet (46%) ohjelmista toteutetaan jollakin yhteistyöjärjestelyllä Yhteistyössä muiden korkeakoulun yksiköitten kanssa 27% (yo 19%, amk 34%) Kv yhteis/kaksoistutkinto 20% (yo 23%, amk 17%) Yhteistyössä muiden suomalaisten kk:jen kanssa 15% (yo 21%, amk 6%) Kv yhteis/kaksoistutkintojen yleisimmät yhteistyömaat: YO: Ruotsi, Saksa, Ranska, Venäjä, Hollanti, Espanja, Portugal, Italia, Iso-Britannia, Viro AMK: Saksa, Iso-Britannia, Hollanti, Kiina 2/2009

61 Opetus ja sisältö (1/2) Opetuskieli Yleensä ei määritelty, kuinka ison osan tutkinnosta voi suorittaa muulla kuin englannin kielellä Jos on määritelty 0-35 % tutkinnosta Kv yhteis/kaksoistutkinnoissa keskimäärin vähemmän Ohjelmien ainutlaatuisuus 57% sisällöstä varta vasten ohjelmaan kehitettyä Kv yhteis/kaksoistutkinnoissa keskimääräistä vähemmän (44%) 41% vastaavan tutkinnon voi suorittaa kotimaisella kielellä samassa kk:ssa 42% vastaavan tutkinnon voi suorittaa muussa suomalaisessa kk:ssa 61 % vastaavan tutkinnon voi suorittaa ulkomaalaisessa kk:ssa Kv yhteis/kaksoistutkinnot keskimääräistä useammin ainutlaatuisia 2/2009

62 Opetus ja sisältö (2/2) Kansainvälinen aspekti osana opetusta 69% ohjelmista on kv aspekti Kv yhteis/kaksoistutkinnoissa kaikissa Sisällössä kv painotus tai liikkuvuusjakso Suomen/ruotsin kielen opinnot Pakollisia suomen/ruotsin opintoja 52% ohjelmista, keskimäärin 7 op Vapaavalintaisia tutkintoon sisällytettäviä suomen/ruotsin opintoja 76 % ohjelmista, keskimäärin 11 op Kv yhteis/kaksoistutkinnoissa pakollisia suomen/ruotsin opintoja harvemmin ja vähemmän 2/2009

63 Opiskelijat ja rekrytointi (1/2) Ohjelmien ensisijainen kohderyhmä Suurin osa kohdistettu laajasti suomalaisille, ulkomaalaisille ja maahanmuuttajataustaisille tai kohderyhmää ei määritelty näillä kriteereillä Kv yhteis/kaksoistutkinnoissa korostuu vaihtoehto sekä suomalaiset että ulkomaalaiset Rekrytoinnin maantieteellinen kohdentaminen Vajaa puolet (40%) kohdentaa rekrytointia maantieteellisesti Kv yhteis/kaksoistutkinnot eivät eroa muista Rekrytointi kohdennetaan ensisijaisesti Aasiaan, Venäjälle, Kiinaan; yliopistoissa myös Eurooppaan; ammattikorkeakouluissa myös Afrikkaan 2/2009

64 Opiskelijat ja rekrytointi (2/2) Ohjelmien vetovoima Opiskelijoita hyväksytään keskimäärin 20 % hakijoista (min 1%, max 83%) Ammattikorkeakouluissa ja vanhemmissa ohjelmissa hyväksymis% pienin Kv yhteis/kaksoistutkinnoissa hyväksymis% sama (22%), hakijoita keskimääräistä vähemmän Ulkomaalaiset opiskelijat Hakijoista 79%, hyväksytyistä 65%, valmistuneista 63% Yliopistoissa (73%) keskimääräistä enemmän ulkomaalaisia Maa- ja metsätalous, IT ja monitieteiset ohjelmat kouluttavat lähes pelkästään ulkomaalaisia (80-90% hyväksytyistä) Kv yhteis/kaksoistutkinnoissa koulutetaan keskimääräistä enemmän ulkomaalaisia (85% hakijoista, 76% hyväksytyistä) 2/2009

65 Kehittämisen motiivit (1/2) Laitoksen/korkeakoulun profilointi kansainvälisesti Korkeakoulun strategisiin tavoitteisiin vastaaminen Työelämä tarvitsee valmiuksia, joita ohjelma tuottaa Laitoksen/korkeakoulun profilointi Suomessa Kansallisiin koulutuspoliittisiin tavoitteisiin vastaaminen Laitoksella/yksikössä olevan erityisosaamisen hyödyntäminen Suomalaisten opiskelijoiden kansainvälistäminen Sellaisen koulutuksen tarjoaminen jota ei aik. saatavilla Yksikön osaamisen vahvist. rekrytoimalla ulkomailta Alueen työelämän kansainvälistäminen Työvoiman saaminen Suomeen Emme saa Suomesta riittävästi hakijoita 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 amk yo 2/2009

66 Kehittämisen motiivit (2/2) Ohjelmien kehittämisen logiikkaa Ylhäältä alas (kansalliset, korkeakoulun tavoitteet) Pragmaattinen (palvelee liikkuvuutta, jo olemassa olevia kv opiskelijoita, kv yhteistyötä) Työelämän palvelu Kehittynyt pikku hiljaa Sisällölliset tekijät 2/2009

67 Korkeakoululta saatu tuki (1/2) Myötämiel. suht. ohjelmaa kohtaan johdon taholta Ohjelman perustamisessa Ulk. opisk. käytännön asioiden järjestämisessä Ulk. opisk. suomen/ruotsin kielen opetuksen järjestämisessä Ulkomaisten opiskelijoiden opintoihin orientoinnissa Myötämiel. suht. ohjelmaa kohtaan muiden yksiköiden taholta Markkinoinnissa ja tiedottamisessa Ulkomaisten opiskelijoiden rekrytoinnissa Koulutusta (opetus)henkilökunnalle Vieraskiel. koul. huomioidaan hlökunnan työajassa/palkassa 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 amk yo 2/2009

68 Korkeakoululta saatu tuki (2/2) Ylhäältä johdosta saatu tuki erityisen tärkeää Tuki erityisen tärkeää: 1) suunnittelussa, 2) rahoituksessa, 3) markkinoinnissa, rekrytoinnissa ja haussa Ohjelmien ristiriitainen suhtautuminen korkeakouluun: Suhtaudutaan myötämielisesti vs. annetaan olla, ei proaktiivista otetta Tuetaan esim. hakuprosessissa vs. korkeakouluhallinto toimii edelleen suomen/ruotsin kielellä 2/2009

69 Englanninkielisen tutkinto-ohjelman erityiset haasteet (1/3) Ei kovasti eroa suomenkieliseen Ulkomaalaisiin opiskelijoihin liittyvät haasteet Markkinointiin ja opiskelijarekrytointiin liittyvät haasteet Opiskelijoihin yleensä liittyvät haasteet Korkeakoulun rakenteisiin ja käytäntöihin liittyvät haasteet Korkeakoulun ja muiden toimijoiden väliseen yhteistyöhön liittyvät haasteet Kansallisen tason koordinointiin liittyvät haasteet 2/2009

70 Englanninkielisen tutkinto-ohjelmien erityiset haasteet (2/3) Ohjelmaan hyväksytyt ulkomaalaiset eivät aloita opintojaan Emme saa riittävästi tasokkaita hakijoita Suomesta Emme saa riittävästi tasokkaita hakijoita ulkomailta Ulkomaal. opiskelijoiden valmiudet itsen. opiskeluun heikot Ulkomaisten opiskelijoiden englannin taito heikko Ulkomaisten opiskelijoiden lähtötaso alan tuntemuksessa heikko Samassa ryhmässä opiskelijat suomal. ja ulkomaal. opsikelijat eivät ole vuorovaikutuksessa Suomalaisopiskelijoiden lähtötaso alan tuntemuksessa heikko Suomalaisopiskelijoiden valmiudet itsen. opiskeluun heikot Suomalaisopiskelijoiden englannin taito heikko 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 Amk Yo 2/2009

71 Englanninkielisen tutkinto-ohjelmien erityiset haasteet (3/3) Ulkomaisille opiskelijoille ei järjesty harjoittelupaikkaa Ohjelmaan vaikea saada opetushenkilökuntaa Ulkomaisten opiskelijoiden palveluiden järjestäminen koordinoimatonta Opetushlökunnan valmiudet monikultt. ryhmän kohtaamiseen heikot Opetushlökunnan englannin taito heikko Yht.työ muiden korkeakoulujen kanssa ei toimi (mikäli järjestetään yht.työssä) Ulkomaisille opisk. vaikea järjestää suomen/ruotsin opintoja 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 Am k Yo 2/2009

72 Erasmus Mundus koordinaattoreiden kokemuksia Eija Kujanpää ää/tkk Pauliina Karvinen/Joensuun yliopisto CIMO

73 NordSecMob-Master s programme in Security and Mobile Computing Helsinki University of Technology TKK, Faculty of Information and Natural Sciences, (coordinator), Espoo, Finland Technical University of Denmark DTU, Lyngby,, Denmark The Royal Institute of Technology KTH, Stockholm, Sweden The Norwegian University of Science and Technology NTNU, Trondheim, Norway University of Tartu UT, Tartu, Estonia

74 NordSecMob: student mobility plan 1 st semester TKK KTH NTNU 2 nd semester DTU TKK KTH NTNU 3 rd semester DTU TKK KTH NTNU Tartu 4 th semester DTU TKK KTH NTNU Tartu

75 Master s s Degree Programme in European Forestry University of Joensuu (coordinator) Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences SLU, Sweden Wageningen University, the Netherlands University of Lleida, Spain University of Freiburg, Germany University for Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences BOKU, Vienna, Austria Federal University of Parana, Brazil University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa Northwest A&F University, China

76 Opiskelijavalinta yhteiset valintaperusteet & kielitaitovaatimukset haku- ja valintaprosessin organisointi & komission aikataulut hakukyselyt hakemusten hallinnollinen tarkastus hakemusten akateeminen arviointi opiskelijavalintamenettelyt kussakin partneriyliopistossa

77 Curriculum + liikkuvuus partnerien reunaehdot tutkinnon tuottamiseksi: tutkintosää ääntö & tutkintorakenne opiskelijoiden fyysisen liikkuvuuden integrointi ohjelmaan sujuvasti ohjelman kokonaislaajuus (ECTS): kurssit & lopputyö (laajuus & arviointi) opintojen seuranta & ohjaus (drop-outs!) outs!)

78 Opiskelijapalaute kunkin korkeakoulun omat palautejärjestelm rjestelmät konsortion yhteinen palautejärjestelm rjestelmä

79 Ohjelman resurssointi koordinaattori / partneri rahoitus ja sen jatkuvuus opetuksen ja tutkimuksen (henkilö)resurssit hallinnon resurssit korkeakoulun tuki ja sitoutuminen (laitos/tiedekunta/opintohallinto/kv-asiat) asiat) johto-/ohjausryhm /ohjausryhmä:: akat.& hallintohenkilökunta kunta kokoukset & matkat ohjelman markkinointi maailmanlaajuisesti: tiedon oikeellisuus & selkeys! www, ohjelmaesite, esitteiden jakelu, hakukyselyt, messut, nettimarkkinointi

80 Sopimukset & raportointi konsortio laatii: apurahasopimus opiskelijat & scholarit Konsortiosopimus sopimukset komission kanssa: hakemus = osa framework-sopimusta vuosittaiset apurahasopimukset raportointi komissiolle 6 kk välein: v talous & toiminta (väliraportit, loppuraportit)

81 Ulkopuolinen arviointi Omakohtainen kokemus MSc EF:n arvioinnista Tekijänä ICA (Association for European Life Sciences Universities) Itsearviointiraportti, haastattelut, loppuraportti Arvioinnin hyödyt riippuvat tekijän taidoista (riippumattomuudesta) ja itsearviointiraportin rehellisyydestä Loppuraportti palvelee ohjekirjana ohjelmaa kehitettäess essä

82 Action 3 kumppanuudesta konsortion jäseneksi? Kolme kumppania: Kiina, Brasilia ja Etelä- Afrikka MSc EF:n eurooppalaisilla opiskelijoilla mahdollisuus harjoitteluun Kurssien suorittaminen vaikeaa lukukausiteknisistä syistä Eivät t tule olemaan mukana konsortiossa ensi kaudella kenties tukijäsenin seninä

83 Kiitos!

84 PILOT EVALUATION PROCESS OF FINNISH ERASMUS MUNDUS MASTER PROGRAMMES Finnish Higher Education Evaluation Council Karl Holm

85 Evaluation process... a process of six months 2008 planning group self assessment / questionnaire reporting 2

86 Why evaluation... real need for programme-specific evaluation relatively young and challenging area to create discussion between the programmes to disseminate best practices / recommendations learning by doing (mistakes) 3

87 Connection to university internationalisation strategy no extra funding by the university more concrete actions should be taken by management resources and support should be allocated correspondingly lack of supporting courses in teaching multicultural groups 4

88 Marketing, recruitment and student selection... satisfaction with highly motivated students 'Tokka' online system by TKK highly recommended University central administration should be included in the selection process 5

89 Teaching and curriculum Erasmus Mundus programmes have had a strong impact on internationalisation at home teacher exchange is available. Staff development measures should be developed further more intense cooperation with the language center to include students and labour market reperesentatives in planning 6

90 Student support and mobility 'Personal Study Plans' strongly encouraged good practice is to check students progression continuously field/intensive course outside of the academic environment 7

91 Labour market cooperation students for the labor market or for further academic studies alumni interaction with society in broader terms arranging practical training placements is a challenge feedback on the programme through sending students on practical training placements 8

92 Quality assurance measures quality culture of EM programmes should be seen linked to overall quality systems of universities setting common quality criteria within the partner network for the whole EM programme is encouraged as well as commonly agreeing on how to measure the quality essential is to allow students to give continuous feedback one commonly used course feedback system is preferred 9

93 Nordic Master Programme Nora Ridgewell, CIMO 2/2009

94 Introduction The Nordic Master Programme Nordic Council of Ministers Initiative Funds for cooperation projects between Nordic higher education institutions Today's presentation Aims and objectives of the Nordic Master Programme Funding Previous Nordic Master Programmes 2/2009

95 Aims Global competition in higher education Nordic higher education institutions need to compete on a global level Combine resources! 2/2009

96 Objectives of the Nordic Master Programme Strengthen the Nordic countries as a region through education Nordic Master Programme to stimulate Nordic cooperation To make the Nordic higher education institutions visible on the international arena and to spread good practice Attract both Nordic and non Nordic students to the Nordic higher education institutions 2/2009

97 The Nordic higher education institutions have a long tradition of cooperation and the Nordic Master Programme offers a possibility to combine resources and strengths 2/2009

98 The Programme Nordic council of Ministers Initiative Started in 2007 This year 1 million Danish crowns available per programme 6 programmes 2/2009

99 What's required? The Call for Proposals published online today Minimum 3 partners from 3 different Nordic countries Dead line /2009

100 Previous Nordic Master Program i applications of which 6 were granted funding for developing Master Program:Energy Engineering Nordic Master in GerontologyEngineering Nordic Master in Plant Pathology Nordic Master in the Religious Roots of Europe Nordic Master in Marine Ecosystems and Climate Nordic Master in Innovative Sustainable Energy Engineering Nordic Master in Innovative Information and Communication Technologies 2/2009

101 Conclusion Good opportunity now to develop the strengths of your higher education institution Funding is now available and the application deadline is soon Contact details: Norwegian Centre for International Cooperation in Higher Education, Kristin Amundsen, Thank you! 2/2009

102 Quality factors in the application process William Aitchison DG Education and Culture European Commission

103 Quality factors in the application process 1. The application and selection procedure Implementation principles for Action 1 Programme Guide and Annual Call for Proposals Selection of Joint Programmes assisted by high-level Selection Board Selection of students and doctoral candidates by consortia Strong support role of Erasmus Mundus National Structures 2

104 Quality factors in the application process 1. The application and selection procedure Involvement of a variety of actors The Executive Agency checks eligibility and selection criteria The EM National Structures check the eligibility of: - European HEIs without an Erasmus Charter - recognition status of degrees awarded in the context of Action 1 - Joint Programmes EU Delegations in third countries check the eligibility of: - third-country HEIs involved 3

105 Quality factors in the application process 1. The application and selection procedure Peer Review Proposal assessed by independent experts Experts selected from the Agency s Call for expressions of interest Two individual assessments followed by a reconciliation (joint/consolidated assessment) and, if divergence between the two experts, the involvement of a third expert Experts in international co-operation in Higher Education + - thematic expertise for Action 1 - Joint Programmes (e.g. experience in assessment of RTD FP projects for joint doctoral programmes) Selection Board composed of high-level academic authorities to assist in the selection of Action 1 - Joint Programmes 4

106 Quality factors in the application process 1. The application and selection procedure Transparent and objective Assessment of proposals based exclusively on the selection and award criteria (eligibility and exclusion criteria must be fulfilled in order for the proposal to be assessed) Experts Assessment Manual published on the Agency website prior to the expert panel Communication of assessment results and experts comments to all applicants 5

107 Quality factors in the application process 2. Basic tips and advice Have your project clearly in mind before starting to read the Programme Guide in detail and before starting to complete the application form Get advice from colleagues experienced in joint programmes Ensure you have the full support of your institutions Ensure a good balance of responsibilities and tasks between partners Use tables, graphics, flowcharts to illustrate your programme structure, the mobility tracks, the organisational aspects, etc. Ask an outsider to read your proposal 6

108 Quality factors in the application process 2. Basic tips and advice A good proposal is: Coherent - avoid contradictions Simple Evidence-based - use examples and justify your needs analysis Clear - follow the application form and answer questions in the right order Explicit - experts cannot read your mind Rigorous - the application is the basis on which your joint programme will be build and monitored, and the cornerstone of your institutional commitment Complete - ensure you have followed all the instructions for submission attached to the application and that the form is duly signed in the original 7

109 Quality factors in the application process 3. EMMCs award criteria (a) Academic quality (25%) Relevance and quality of the needs analysis, objectives, added value Capacity of the partnership to achieve the objectives Learning and professional outcomes, acquired competences Relevance to the professional/economic sectors concerned Relevance/capacity of the programme structure to achieve the objectives and concrete outcomes Presence and quality of field work, placement, internships offered 8

110 Quality factors in the application process 3. EMMCs award criteria (a) Academic quality (25%) The Consortium made a survey of existing European training programmes at Masters level in the field There is linkage between research, education and practice offered by a consortium which has credentials in excellence and is composed of partners that are complementary The competences and learning outcomes are very well described and were designed after consultation 9

111 Quality factors in the application process 3. EMMCs award criteria (b) Course integration (25%) Degree of integration of the joint programme Nature of degree awarded and level of recognition among the partners Quality of joint mechanisms, criteria, standards applied to candidates and enrolled students (admission, selection, assessment, examination) Extent to which recognition (e.g. ECTS) and transparency (e.g. Diploma Supplement) tools are used within the consortium 10

112 Quality factors in the application process 3. EMMCs award criteria (b) Course integration (25%) The final degree to be awarded already exists and double degree agreements have already been provided The proposed course is modularised and the ECTS credit allocation is done in a proper way The application procedure will be online and common to all students, and the selection process will be very transparent and pass different filters 11

113 Quality factors in the application process 3. EMMCs award criteria (c) Course management, visibility and sustainability (20%) Quality of co-operation mechanisms, degree of institutionalisation Appropriateness of resources (human, financial) allocated by partners to the EMMC, existence of complementary funding for the functioning of the course and the award of additional scholarships Nature and quality of the course promotion activities aiming to attract the best students and scholars in Europe and the rest of the world Involvement of other actors (associated members) in the course sustainability 12

114 Quality factors in the application process 3. EMMCs award criteria (c) Course management, visibility and sustainability (20%) Detailed description of the co-operation mechanisms to be created: Board of Directors, External Advisory Board, Admissions and Quality Committee, Secretariat and Students Checkpoint The partners have a very extensive world-wide network useful for attracting students and scholars A report on all the financial aspects will be presented at every meeting of the Board of Directors, which adds a control value to the financial management of scholarships 13

115 Quality factors in the application process 3. EMMCs award criteria (d) Students facilities and follow-up (15%) Existence and coverage of the student agreement Nature and quality of services offered to students/scholars (including insurance, visa support, assistance to students with families or with special needs) Language policy and level of integration in the EMMC Level of integration of students in the local communities and the possibilities offered to allow them to interconnect 14

116 Quality factors in the application process 3. EMMCs award criteria (d) Students facilities and follow-up (15%) The Consortium has agreed to develop a learning Platform which may be really helpful for students The language policy is clearly presented (language diversity, language of instruction, languages of examination, language learning support offered) All course documents will be available online. Linguistic, cultural preparation, coaching and counselling, housing facilities and social activities are planned 15

117 Quality factors in the application process 3. EMMCs award criteria (e) Quality assurance and evaluation (15%) Nature and relevance of the internal evaluation mechanisms proposed Existence of external quality assurance mechanisms involving external bodies Extent to which all actors (stakeholders) are involved in the evaluation exercise (students, academic/administrative authorities, representatives from the public or private sectors concerned, etc.) Extent to which gender equality and support to disadvantaged students has been properly addressed and will be monitored during the EMMC 16

118 Quality factors in the application process 3. EMMCs award criteria (e) Quality assurance and evaluation (15%) The students will have the opportunity to evaluate teachers and courses, along with non-academic aspects such as infrastructure and organisational points A quality assurance committee (international panel) will intervene to monitor the programme The evaluation of the programme s success in terms of completion of the Masters Course (time to get first employment, career performance) is also relevant 17

119 Quality factors in the application process 4. Study on Quality of EM Masters Courses Outputs Visits to 6 EMMC co-ordinators (+ 2 partners) Final Report + Handbook of Quality Self-assessment via online Analytical Tool on EMQA website - Exercise will be repeated this year with 6 more EMMCs 18

120 Quality factors in the application process 4. Study on Quality of EM Masters Courses Four criteria for excellence FLAF (Facilities, Logistics and Finance) QUIL (Quality of Leadership and Institutions) QATL (Quality of Teaching and Learning) JUPI (Joined-up Practice and Integration) 19

121 Quality factors in the application process 4. Study on Quality of EM Masters Courses FLAF (Facilities, Logistics and Finance) When students apply to your course Verifying student qualifications When third-country students travel to Europe Introducing students to European academic practice When students move between partner institutions Placements and internships Student finances Communicating and consulting with students Benefitting from alumni 20

122 Quality factors in the application process 4. Study on Quality of EM Masters Courses QUIL (Quality of Leadership and Institutions) The highest quality academic staff Creating a strong course brand Securing institutional commitment Institutional commitment to international teaching and research Continuity and leadership Succession strategies Financial sustainability 21

123 Quality factors in the application process 4. Study on Quality of EM Masters Courses QATL (Quality of Teaching and Learning) Designing an excellent curriculum Communicating course objectives and outcomes Consistent assessment methods Formal course review Ethical standards Developing learning skills 22

124 Quality factors in the application process 4. Study on Quality of EM Masters Courses JUPI (Joined-up Practice and Integration) Selecting students Consortium information system Policy for course fees Division of labour across the consortium A consortium-wide quality assessment process Managing the consortium Develop a clear policy for awarding the Master degree 23

125 Action 1 A - EMMC Implementation Timetable Consortium Dates Agency Submission of proposal 30 April 2009 (deadline) 1 April to 15 May Processes proposals (eligibility check) 25 May to 5 June Expert Assessment Panels Promotes the EMMC Receives 3rd-country student applications Attends the EM Joint Programmes Conference Last week of June Beginning of July July 2009 to January 2010 November 2009 Selection Board Proposal Selection Decision Communication of Selection Result Signs Framework Partnership Agreements with selected EMMCs Organises the EM Joint Programmes Conference

126 Action 1 A - EMMC Implementation Timetable Consortium Dates Agency Sends Category A scholarship proposal to the Agency together with EMMC Agreement Student Agreement Informs Category A scholarship holders and assists in obtaining visa Submits Category B scholarships proposal to Agency First edition of EMMC can start 31 January February 2010 March 2010 End of May June 2010 As from July 2010 Processes scholarship proposals (eligibility check) and checks correctness of the EMMC and Student Agreements Validates Category A scholarships Provides the EU Delegations with the names of the grantees to facilitate visa procedures Signs Specific Grant Agreements with selected EMMCs and pays first instalment of the grant

127 Action 1 B - EMJD Implementation Timetable Consortium Dates Agency Submission of summary sheet (on a voluntary basis) Submission of proposal Promotes the EMJD Receives Category A fellowship applications Attends the EM Joint Programmes conference 31 March April 2009 (deadline) 1 April to 15 May Processes proposals (eligibility check) and recruit experts 25 May to 5 June Expert Assessment Panels Last week of June Beginning of July July 2009 to January 2010 November 2009 Selection Board Proposal Selection Decision Communication of Selection Result Signs Framework Partnership Agreements with selected EMJDs Organises the EM Joint Programmes conference

128 Action 1 B - EMJD Implementation Timetable Consortium Dates Agency Sends Category A fellowship proposals to Agency together with: EMJD Agreement Doct. Candidate Agreement Informs Category A fellowship holders and assists them in obtaining their visa Submits Category B fellowship proposals to Agency 31 January 2010 Processes fellowship proposals (eligibility check) and checks correctness of the EMJD and Doct. Candidate Agreements 28 February 2010 Validates Category A fellowships March 2010 End of May June 2010 Provides EU Delegations with the names of grantees to facilitate visa procedures Signs Specific Grant Agreements with selected EMJDs and pays first grant instalment First edition of the EMJD can start As from July 2010 Final date for fellowship holders to start EMJD activities 31 March 2011