View
226
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Mission Statement
• is devoted to scientific research and teaching; it also provides services for the benefit of the public;
• is committed to academic excellence and strives to achieve the highest international standards;
• places high value on the reflection on the consequences of science;
• promotes free discourse and cooperation between the various disciplines;
• is committed, as the largest university in Switzerland, to the diversity of academic knowledge and pursues the full range of relevant disciplines.
The University of Zurich ...
Basis
9.957
12.174
9.937
14.566
10.452
1.771
3.5954.661
23.817
2.023
6.407
12.552
0
5
10
15
20
25
BS BE FR GE LS LU NE SG ZH USI EPFL ETHZ
Students at Swiss Universities (WS 2005/06)
Basis
In 1998, the University of Zurich became an autonomous legal entity with a global budget.
Legal Form
Basis
science: bottom-up approach
autonomy is appropriate andeven necessary for a university
• self-orientation (internally, externally)• self-management as a principle of ruling
and organizing science
Significance of Autonomy
Basis
Autonomy
→ obligation to self-organization on all levels
→ obligation to report on the success of self-organization
Significance of Quality Assurance
evaluation:
success factor in the competition among universities
Basis
• competitive allocation of funds (Forschungskredit)
• careful recruitment of staff (science and administration)
• periodical evaluation of all academic and administrative units
• promotion of young researchers • supervision of students, student surveys
Instruments of Quality Assurance
Competitive Allocation of Funds
• excellence should be honoured• Instruments:
• quota of third-party funds accepted as an
indicator of success
• competitive promotion of projects
• results of evaluations do not automatically influence allocation of funds
Fundamentals
Competitive Allocation of Funds
Third-party Funds at UZH (Mio. CHF)
020406080
100120140160180
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Competitive Allocation of Funds
strategic part promotion of projects set up by more than one
university or faculty
competitive part promotion of young researchers
Research Fund („Forschungskredit“)
Competitive Allocation of Funds
Research Fund 2001-2006:Applications and Grants
2001 2002 2003 2004
applications MeF,VSF,MNF
grantedThF,RWF,WWF,PhF
grantedMeF,VSF,MNF
250
200
150
100
50
0
2005 2006
applicationsThF,RWF,WWF,PhF
73
2348
28
72110
42
105
36
108
39
105
82
3227
94
34
121
27
145
38
41
62
28
300
Competitive Allocation of Funds
248
123
266
159
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
2004 2005
applications
granted
Projects of UZH supported bythe Swiss National Science Foundation
Appointments 2000-2005
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
other
AP SNF
AP tenure track
assistant prof.
associate prof.
full prof.
Appointments 2000-2005
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
total
female
Germans
from othercountries
Appointments 2000-2005 (without SNF)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
3. list position
2. list position
1. list position
Evaluation at the University of Zurich
• Assess, assure, and improve the quality of academic work in research, teaching, and services as well as assure the quality of management and administration.
• Provide decision aids to support medium and long-term strategic planning.
• Report to the public (accountability).
Objectives
Evaluation at the University of Zurich
University Law UZH (Universitätsgesetz)
§ 4: Die Universität trifft Vorkehrungen zur Sicherung der Qualität von Forschung, Lehre und Dienstleistungen.
Legal Base (I)
Evaluation at the University of Zurich
University Statutes UZH (Universitätsordnung)• Creation of an Evaluation Office
Regulations for Evaluations
Mission Statement UZH• The University monitors its activities in research,
teaching and services, as well as its own management, by means of regular evaluation.
Legal Base (II)
Evaluation at the University of Zurich
Evaluation Office
Board of the University
Extended Executive BoardSenate
Executive Board of the University
Evaluation Office (I)
Evaluation at the University of Zurich
Evaluation Office (II)
Personnel
• Director (Professor) 60%
formal affiliation: ETHZ
• Managing Director: 100 %
• Project Managers: 400 %
• Secretary: 80 %
Evaluation at the University of Zurich
Evaluation Office (III)
Projects• about 115 evaluation projects within six years• continuous planning
Costs• 0,14 % of the University’s budget
(including third-party funds)
Evaluation at the University of Zurich
• self-evaluation report• experts’ report• comprehensive evaluation report• recommendations to Executive Board• Follow-up• information of the public / Monitoring
Procedure (I)
necessary precondition:scientific approach to evaluation
Evaluation at the University of Zurich
Procedure (II)
re-evaluation (6 years after signing agreement on objectives)
Informed Peer-review
Evaluation Office
Monitoring
Evaluation Office
Follow-up, Agreement on
objectives
Executive Board
Evaluation at the University of Zurich
Retrospective on last five yearsand future perspectives
• structure and organization• human, financial, and material resources• management and administration• research and teaching• promotion of young academics/scientists• services• internal quality assurance measures• profile of strengths and weaknesses
Self-evaluation
Evaluation at the University of Zurich
Site Visit by Peers
External Peers
Administrative andTechnical Staff
Professors
Students
Assistants, Research Associates Ph.D. Students
Postdocs
Lecturers
Evaluation at the University of Zurich
is based on …• self-evaluation report• experts’ (peers’) report • responses of unit under evaluation• bibliometrical analysis• surveys (students, alumni, academic staff,
personnel, customers)• course evaluations
Comprehensive Evaluation Report(Evaluation Office)
Follow-up
• agreement
between the Executive Board of the university
and the evaluated unit on measures to be
taken in consideration of the results of the
evaluation
• implementation
of measures by the evaluated unit
Objectives
• Executive Board proposes measures• Follow-up meeting with the evaluated unit• agreement on objectives• evaluated unit works out concepts• Executive Board approves concepts• implementation• monitoring after 2 years (evaluation office)
Procedure
Follow-up
Board of the University• discusses the results of an evaluation• can give hints about measures to take• is informed about the Follow-up meeting and the
agreement on objectives
Third parties (I)
Follow-up
Faculty• comments on available resources• Dean participates in the Follow-up meeting
Third parties (II)
Follow-up
• intensify research• focussing• promotion of young researchers• improve internal / external cooperation• clarify structures (Central Services)• formulation of mandates („Leistungsaufträge“,
Central Services)
Focal points of past agreements on objectives
Follow-up
Conclusion
• Evaluations find acceptance. They forge identity in the
units under evaluation.• They foster communication and transparency – within
the university and with strategic and political
authorities.• They uncover strengths and weaknesses (and the
mere announcement of a pending evaluation can in
part contribute to performance improvement).• They are indispensable for structure and development
planning.
Strengths
Conclusion
• Evaluation and implementing the results of the
evaluation require a lot of work and are time-
consuming for all participants.• If human and equipment resources are found to be
insufficient, the funds required can not always be
secured from the university or the state.
Weaknesses