Mapping Diversity: Developing a European Classification of ... - U-Map

More documents

Recommendations

Info

What is more problematic (or more diffi cult to interpret) is that the results of the overall ranking and the relevance scores on the individual dimensions are not completely consistent. Public private character, legal status and, above all, size score high on the relevance scale whereas they are very frequently mentioned as the least important dimensions. Innovation intensiveness scores relatively low on the relevance scale but is frequently mentioned as most important dimension. 73 Figure 2: Most and least important dimensions regional engagement cult engagement least important most important legal pub-priv mode delivery size eur research prof international innovation intens research intens lll prof orientation range subjects type degree 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 MAPPING DIVERSITY
74 The indicators The position of the higher education institutions and how they score on the fourteen dimensions cannot be determined using the abstract descriptions presented in the previous chapter. For that purpose 32 indicators were selected. These indicators can be seen as quantitative information that can be used to assess the position of a higher education institution on the dimensions. Many of the indicators specifi ed are composite indicators, combining two or more data-elements. In this report we often use a shorthand ‘code’ when referring to the indicators. This ‘code’ consists of a number (referring to the dimension the indicator belongs to) and a letter (see Table 5). This chapter consists of two parts. In the fi rst part we elaborate on three characteristics of the 30 indicators that were used in the on-line questionnaires. First we look into the validity of the indicators; do the responding higher education institutions think that the indicators we have selected, measure the phenomena we are investigating? Do the indicators convey a ‘correct’ picture of the dimension? After answering that question the focus shifts to the question of whether the information reported is trustworthy: the perceived reliability of the information reported. Since there are signifi cant differences in the status of the indicators (some are based on widely accepted standard statistics, whereas others have a more experimental character) the project team thought it to be imperative to check the perceived reliability of the information reported. The fi nal characteristic of the indicators discussed is whether it is feasible for responding higher education institutions to collect the information on the indicators. This issue was one of the main reasons for the survey. A large part of the information underlying the classifi cation has to come from the individual higher education institutions. Given growing survey fatigue and the administrative burdens higher education institutions have to face, it is crucial to know how higher education institutions think about the burden this questionnaire puts on them. Four indications for feasibility are described: the time needed to fi nd and report the information, the perceived ease of fi nding the information, the use of existing sources and the percentage of valid responses received. The second part of the chapter comprises the scores on the indicators. MAPPING DIVERSITY
Page 1 and 2:
Mapping Diversity Developing a Euro
Page 4 and 5:
Mapping Diversity Contents Developi
Page 6 and 7:
The research project team consisted
Page 8 and 9:
2. Building a European Classificati
Page 10 and 11:
with university rankings, rankings
Page 12 and 13:
Classifi cations use the principles
Page 14 and 15:
Table 1: Draft and classifi cation
Page 16 and 17:
• Fontys Hogescholen, the Netherl
Page 18 and 19:
3.1.2 Response to the survey 67 Res
Page 20 and 21:
The question ‘this dimension is e
Page 22 and 23:
4. Conclusions 21 In this chapter w
Page 24 and 25: of information on non-degree offeri
Page 26 and 27: 4.3 Reduction of the number of dime
Page 28 and 29: Dimension Indicator new and suggest
Page 30 and 31: 5. Operational implementation Part
Page 32 and 33: etter world’ from 19 th to 20 th
Page 34 and 35: Government model In this model gove
Page 36 and 37: also underline the need for coopera
Page 38 and 39: Bailey, K. D. (1994) Typologies and
Page 40 and 41: Annex I: Exploratory analysis of ex
Page 42 and 43: EU The Rebaspinoff projects (part o
Page 44 and 45: World of Learning. If a further bre
Page 46 and 47: Annex II: The case studies 45 Case
Page 48 and 49: Indicator 1.3.1.: number of program
Page 50 and 51: Indicator 3.1.2a.: number of Europe
Page 52 and 53: Case Study: University of Strathcly
Page 54 and 55: Indicator 1.3.2.: number of program
Page 56 and 57: Indicator 4.2.2.: number of part ti
Page 58 and 59: The dimension ‘cultural engagemen
Page 60 and 61: Figure 4: Institutional profi les b
Page 62 and 63: and life long learning. Feasibility
Page 64 and 65: Conclusions The pilot survey showed
Page 66 and 67: Indicator 10b: The percentage of pr
Page 68 and 69: Figure 32: Higher education institu
Page 70 and 71: Introduction 69 Rationale for the s
Page 72 and 73: Table 2: Age strata IAU based strat
Page 76 and 77: Table 5: Overview of indicators and
Page 78 and 79: Figure 3: Opinions regarding the st
Page 80 and 81: Figure 4: Opinions on the statement
Page 82 and 83: enrolment and 12a: legal status) or
Page 84 and 85: Data from existing sources The ques
Page 86 and 87: Valid cases The fourth indication o
Page 88 and 89: ate (3r d doctor cycle) or (1st bac
Page 90 and 91: If 40% is used as a cutoff point, t
Page 92 and 93: doct er mast Figure 16: Higher educ
Page 94 and 95: As a result of the discussion on th
Page 96 and 97: Indicator 6d: Financial volume of p
Page 98 and 99: doctorate er mast or bachel or +mas
Page 100 and 101: Indicator 9a: Enrolment The number
Page 102 and 103: er mast or bachel er mast or bachel
Page 106 and 107: Indicator 13b: Exhibitions 105 The
Page 110 and 111: The clustering is based on the corr
Page 112 and 113: as well as dimension 4 (involvement
Page 114 and 115: Appendix 1: Comments 113 Dimension
Page 116 and 117: 7e number of program offered abroad
show all

Mapping Diversity: Developing a European Classification of ... - U-Map

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?