5) name of the hei the state university higher school of ... · 5) name of the hei the state...

1

5) Name of the HEI The State University – Higher School of Economics (SU-HSE)

6) Person completing the questionnaire, position and contact details

Please add any other staff (position) who help you completing the questionnaire. The State University - Higher School of Economics 20, Myasnitskaya st. Moscow, 101000 Russia Tatiana Meshkova Director of the Centre for Cooperation with OECD (OECD-HSE Partnership Centre) International Organizations Research Institute Tel.: 7 495 621 44 64 Fax: 7 495 621 87 11 E-mail: [email protected] www.oecdcentre.hse.ru www.iori.hse.ru Please, contact Ms Meshkova for detailed information on institution‟s profile and context and teachers ranking (students poll) Boris Zhelezov Deputy Vice-Rector for International Relations Tel: 7 495 621 32 20 E-mail: [email protected] Please, contact Mr Zhelezov for detailed information on Extra compensation for academic performance (ECAP) Alla Orekhova Director of the Analytical Centre Tel: 7 495 623 37 83 E-mail: [email protected] Please, contact Mrs Orekhova for detailed information on Business partner chairs and the Innovation Education Programme Alexandre Susokolov Head of the Laboratory of Sociological Researches, Professor Tel.: 7 495 152 16 01 E-mail: [email protected] Please, contact Mr Susokolov for detailed additional information on teachers ranking (students poll)

7) Number of students of the institution (full time equivalent students) Total number of students (including Moscow hosting university and its branches in Saint-Petersburg, Nizhny Novgorod and Perm) – 16 732 Full time equivalent students (including Moscow hosting university and its branches in Saint-Petersburg, Nizhny Novgorod and Perm) – 13 175 (by 01.09.2007, http://d1.hse.ru/figures/)

8) Proportion of Bachelor/Masters/Doctoral degress/ Other degrees offered (use figures and %) Bachelor (full-time on-campus students, including Moscow hosting university and its branches in Saint-Petersburg, Nizhny Novgorod and Perm) – 4 904 (40%) Specialists (full-time on-campus students, including Moscow hosting university and its branches in Saint-Petersburg, Nizhny Novgorod and Perm) – 6071 (50%) Masters (full-time on-campus students, including Moscow hosting university and its branches in Saint-Petersburg, Nizhny Novgorod, no masters students in Perm branch) – 1259 (10%) (by 01.09.2007, http://d1.hse.ru/figures/) * bachelor degree - study for at least 4 years; specialist degree - study for at least 5 years; master degree - study for at least 6 years (4+2>) Post-graduate students, aspirantura (on-campus and off-campus students, including Moscow hosting university and its branch in Nizhny Novgorod ) - 640 (by 24.03.2008,http://d1.hse.ru/figures/)

9) Full time equivalent number of teaching staff and number of teacher-to-student ratio Total number of teaching staff (full-time equivalent number of teaching is not calculated) in Moscow hosting university and its branches in Saint-Petersburg, Nizhny Novgorod and Perm – 1732, including: • Internal teaching staff: - Full-time – 1018 - Part-time (0,5 & 0,25 of the academic position) – 117 • Part-time visiting teaching staff - 597 (Year of reference – 2007/2008 academic year) Number of teacher-to-student ratio: 8 students for 1 teacher (in average)

10) In major teaching fields, can you please show the breakdown using the list below, of the students bodies (figures or percentage of students enrolled). Humanities (philosophy, history, literature, linguistic, sociology..) : see question 7

11) In case the list above is irrelevant to your institution, please use the comment box below to show specific breakdown of students using your own classification. а. Faculty of Economics – 1 324 (16%) b. Faculty of World Economy and International Affaires – 725 (9%) c. Faculty of Sociology – 558 (7%) d. Faculty of Applied Political Sciences – 556 (7%) - Department of Business and Political Journalism – 296 (3%) e. Faculty of Philosophy, including Department of Cultural Sciences – 143 (2%) f. Faculty of Management – 1 569 (19%) g. Faculty of Law – 887 (11%) h. Faculty of Business-IT – 552 (7%) - Department of Applied Mathematics – 83 (1%) -Department of Engineering – 81 (1%) i. Faculty of Psychology – 314 (4%) j. Faculty of Public and Municipal Administration – 613 (7%) k. International College of Economics and Finance – 450 (5%) (only hosting Moscow university, only full-time enrolled students, Year of reference – 2007/2008 academic year) Detailed information on the SU-HSE is attached in separate files enclosed further.

12) Does your institution select the students? Please specify at which level Yes (at Bachelor level (entrance selection), at Master level (for students from other TEIs), and at Post-graduate (aspirantura) level)

13) What are the main commitments of the institution aimed at enhancing the quality of its teaching?

1 is high 4 is low

Initial recruitment process of teaching staff 1

Continuing education for faculty 1

Institutional policy design, monitoring and implementation 2

Programme design, programme monitoring and implementation 2

Student evaluation (i.e. evaluation, achieved by the students, of the programmes or of their learning experience or of the learning environment)

1

Professional development to pedagogy (pedagogical tools, teachers behaviour and attitudes) 4

Funds to promote motivative teaching 3

Prize endowment for 'good' teachers or remarkable QT initiated by teachers 1

3

Support to organisations, management of programmes at teachers level 3

Support to organisation, management of programmes at institutional level (departmental or institutional level) 3

Support to teaching and learning environment (libraries, computing facilities, virtual learning environment...) 1

Support to students(eg. councelling service, career advice, mentoring, students associations...) 1

Feedback loop of the QT initiatives on the teaching experience 4

Support to student learning (initiatives helping students to work efficiently) 2

14) IMPORTANT: What is (are) the specific QT initiative(s) your institution woud like to address particularly through this questionnaire (1 to 3 QT initiatives): Please specify: Teachers ranking (Students assessments of teachers or students polls) Extra compensation for academic performance (ECAP) Business partner chairs

15) Is your institution accredited or externally adjudged in relation to quality assurance or enhancement at institutional level? Yes (0)

16) Additional comments?

The complex assessment report - 2004 with data on accredited TEIs, including the SU-HSE is presented on the web-site of the of the National Accreditation Agency (http://www.nica.ru/ru/downloads/PDF/prikaz/accred_24_04_2004.pdf ) The SU-HSE certificate of accreditation is put on the University web-site http://www.hse.ru/infopage/documents/svidetelstvo.htm

17) When has the most recent accreditation or evaluation occured at institutional level and at programme level? At institutional level – 2004 At programme level – annually – on a basis of the module of collection of the data on learning conditions for some education programmes (see Question 16).

18) Other additional bodies? The Federal Service of Supervision in the Sphere of Education (FSSSE) – the Ministry‟s affiliated agency, responsible for the overall/complex quality assurance process at the national level, providing strategic management of the quality assurance system and performing following functions: • reviewing applications from educational institutions for licensing, attestation and state accreditation; • managing (organization and coordination) quality assessment procedures on programme and institutional levels; • delivering licenses for educational activity and state accreditation certificates. There are also several organizations responsible for specific stages of quality assurance process: • The Department for licensing, accreditation and inspection in education performing management functions, and coordinating work of the Accreditation Collegium and Expert Commissions. • The Guild of Experts developing methodological and regulatory materials and providing informational & organizational assistance for the activity of experts participating in quality assessment. • The Accreditation Collegium reviewing materials submitted by TEIs for accreditation, including the reports of Expert Commissions, and taking decisions on state accreditation delivery for TEIs. The members of the Accreditation Collegium are the heads of educational institutions, and representatives of public organizations and federal executive agencies. • The Council for Coordination of Quality Assurance in Higher Education is a consultation & advisory agency, attached to the FSSSE, defining the quality assessment mechanisms and helping TEIs to resolve theirs quality assurance tasks. • The Main Expert Centre resolving financial issues for licensing and attestation work of Expert commissions. • The National Accreditation Agency providing the informational, methodological and organizational basis for state accreditation of educational institutions; registering the accredited TEIs and composing a state accreditation database; elaborating accreditation indexes and criteria ; preparing annual reviews. • Informational and Methodological Centre for Attestation of Educational Organizations implementing analyses, the systematization of the results of educational institutions attestation, and forming a single software and information support system for the attestation procedures implementation. • The Federal Testing Centre performing methodological work in student performance assessment, and systematizing and generalizing the results of such assessments.

19) What are the main methods used to accreditate or to adjudge the institution in relation to quality assurance or engagement?

1) Self-evaluation + peer review: yes

20) 2) Other additional main methods used?

The process of state quality assessment consists of three stages: licensing, attestation and accreditation, which have been consolidated into a single comprehensive assessment procedure since 2000. Currently procedures of attestation and accreditation are merged. Licensing implies to the assessment of compliance of working conditions and environment of TEI‟s activity (the quality of classrooms, laboratory and library equipment, the level of teaching staff etc.) with state requirements. Licensing includes the documents review provision, the external expert reviews, including site visits by Expert commissions. The licensing procedure is performed every five years by the Federal Service on Surveillance in Education and Science. Licensing is analogous to the “ex-ante” procedure in European quality assurance systems. Attestation implies to the assessment of the compliance of content, level and quality of education of graduates with the requirements with the State educational standards, the identification of trends in academic process development and methods of overcoming negative trends. At the stage of attestation, the state quality assessment procedure includes self-evaluation of each educational programme that produced by graduates and TEI as a whole, and the compilation of report anticipating the external experts assessment (reports on self-evaluation are published on the TEI‟s website two months before the site visit of Expert commission). 10 educational programmes are chosen by experts at random and some other TEI‟s activities are the subject for the expert‟s site review. The report on the expert review‟s results is published on the website of the National Accreditation Agency (www.nica.ru). A positive attestation assessment makes it possible for a TEI to undergo the stage of accreditation. Accreditation implies to the establishment/confirmation of the state-accredited status of an educational institution by type (higher education institution), ownership status (state/private – state in the case of the SU-HSE and form (institute/academy/university – university in the case of the SU-HSE) with the establishment of a list of educational programmes in which the TEI has the right to issue national diplomas. State accreditation includes: (1) assessment of compliance of the main areas of activity of the TEI with the accreditation criteria, (2) official decision of the Accreditation Collegium on the state status of a TEI (its type and form), and (3) authorization to issue national state diplomas, to use an official seal and to provide number of social benefits for academic staff and students. Based on the results of state accreditation, a TEI receives a diploma of state accreditation, including a list of accredited programmes and the period of accreditation. Information about accredited TEIs and programmes is published in an official registry, in an annual compendium and on the website www.nica.ru. State accreditation may be compared to the “post-ante” procedure in European quality assurance systems.

21) Other addditional bodies? The National Accreditation Agency (it is not an external agency but affiliated with the governmental body)

22) What are the main methods used to accreditate programmes?

1) Self-evaluation + peer review: (on the basis of the Report of some education programmes of a TEI – So-called „ the module of collection of the data on learning conditions for some education programmes‟ (in printed and electronic forms). This module includes the following information: • Profile information - Bank details of the University - Position and contact details of University Leadership - List of founders, Ministry‟s supervision - List of normative documents - List and description of University‟s chairse - List of main education programmes • Information on Indicators of State Accreditation - Detailed information on main education programmes - Information on post-graduated education and research programmes (aspirantura) - Information on doctoral programmes (doctorantura) - Effectiveness of Doctoral Research Councils activities - Information on research projects implemented by the University for the last 5 years - Information on monographs published by the University for the last 5 years - Information on academic staff of each chair - Information, methodic and staff provision for each profession under attestation.

5

23) What is the scope covered by the accreditation or the process in relation to quality assurance or enhancement (on teaching aspects only)?

1 is high 4 is low

Academic content of programmes 1

Recruitment process of teaching staff 3

Human resources policy 3

Pedagogy 1

Facilities for teaching and learning 1

Quality assurance set up by the institution to support quality teaching 2

Impact of student experience 4

24) If case the institution is not accredited in your coutnry or in your region, what can be the consequences?

1 is high 4 is low

No funding or less funding received 4

The institution cannot operate 1

The institution is obliged to undertake corrective actions 1

No consequence 4

25) Additional consequences? The institution cannot issue the official state diploma for graduates

26) What reforms has your institution engaged in after the evaluation, in order to obtain full accreditation and/or to take into account the recommendations of the evaluators? The SU-HSE passed the accreditation successfully in 2004 without any specific remarks. But taking into consideration the shift currently occurred from the institution quality assessment to the programme quality assessment the SU-HSE places high emphasis on its education programme accreditation. For example the number of accredited educational programmes nearly doubled in 2004-2005 ( there were 37 accredited education programmes in hosting SU-HSE and its regional branches (after the results of complex assessment in 2004) and there were 62 accredited education programmes in 2005). The SU-HSE currently uses new parameters and benchmarks for accreditation taking into consideration such criteria as provision of education programmes (programme structure and content) and application of innovation methods in teaching and learning process. The SU-HSE also focuses on the organization and methodological support for quality assessment at institutional as well as programme levels: along with the existing Office for learning and methodical support a new Analytical Centre is formcreated now, which one of the main goals is the monitoring of the quality of education.

27) If the programme is not accredited or if the evaluation reveals poor or bad results, what are the consequences for the programme?

1 is high 4 is low

No funding or less funding received 4

The programme cannot operate 1

The institution is obliged to undertake corrective actions to make the programme operate 1

No consequence 4

28) Has your institution recently required a private accreditation or evaluation (labelisation, etc) at which level? There is no private accreditation practice, but there are several national ranking in which the SU-HSE possesses leading position. For example the SU-HSE takes: • 3-4th places in the ranking of Economics TEIs composed by the Ministry of Education and Science (2006) (http://d1.hse.ru/figures/294424.html), • 1st place among 100 TEIs in the ranking called “Most successful Russian graduates” composed by the journal Kommersant-Den‟gi (2008) • is included in the league A (the highest) from the graduates career prospects point of view (according to the results of review implemented by the NGO Delovaya Rossiya) (2007) • is included in the highest league of TEIs in the teaching field „Management and Economics‟ (according to the results of Independent education ranking agency Reit‟OR (2007)

(http://d1.hse.ru/figures/294321.html)

29) In your country, to what extent does your institution have the freedom or the autonomy to....

1 is high 4 is low

Design the programmes 1

Implement the programmes 1

Assess the outcomes of the programme 1

Recruit teachers 1

Discretion to reward the teachers 1

Assess the teachers 1

30) Does your institution (or part thereof) assign certain teachers to specific classes or specific levels (eg. at an introductory level)? Yes, teachers with a significant academic experience are usually assigned to lecturing and teachers with a little pedagogical experience (usually young teachers combining teaching activities with post-graduates studies) could conduct practical classes and seminars. At the same time the SU-HSE, realizing in 2006-2007 the Innovation Education Programme under the framework of the Priority national project „Education‟, had been created such innovation forms and structures of education as research and learning laboratories, research and education centers aimed to combine the education process, research and professional training and integrate all participants of education process with different academic and research experience (students, young researches, academics, external experts) into the common process of the knowledge production and project-based activities.

31) Do external regulations/guidelines oblige or expect new recruited teachers to be trained initially or on continuing education?

Yes, the recruitment of teachers is regulated by the Labour Code of the Russian Federation (Chapter 52. Features of regulation of academic work) and the Decree No. 4114 of the Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation of 26 November 2002 “On ratification of statement on process of filling of academic positions in a higher education institutions in the Russian Federation”. This national legislation defines /stipulates procedures and conditions of the competitive selection and labour contracts of academics.

32) If you have external regulations or guidelines, how are they organised and impact on your institution? So, all academic positions in a TEI are elective. All labour contracts of academics are signed after positive competition results. Call for applications for academic vacancy is announced by Rector and posted in the TEI‟s information desk (on the web-site, in University‟s and faculties journals and bulletin boards etc.) and in the mass-media no later than two months before the selection process. This competition is announced without fail annually in the end of academic year and optionally during the academic year. Within the SU-HSE such competition is organized usually 3 times in the academic year. In the SU-HSE the teacher participating in this competition must provide the examination commission (Chair Board, University‟s Academic Council and Rector) with the proposal, including the full list of publications and information regarding his academic performance such as: 1. The quality of teaching and methodic work: - the scope (working-time) and content of teaching activities; - participation in the methodic activities (e.g. the preparation of education programmes, education materials, curriculums etc.) 2. The quality of research activities: - preparation of manuals, monographs, articles, reports, editing etc.; - application of new methodic and pedagogic practices, ICT; - support provision to students. 3. The development of academic qualification (scholarships, participation in conferences etc.) 4. The results of assessment of the chair‟s Head, the results of students assessments and ranking. The Chair Board can propose for applicant to give a lecture, master-class or practical seminar to confirm his qualification. The discussion and selection of proposals are implemented by the Chair‟s Academic Council (in most cases) or by the University‟s Academic Council (for proposals of leading and famous professors). The decision on selection is taken by a majority by (secret) ballot. The Rector assign the elected teachers on the academic position after the recommendations of the Chair/University Academic Council. After the successful selection the teacher sighing the labour contract for 1,3 or 5 years. This competition allows:

7

- to recruit the most talented and motivated academics; - to make the recruitment process transparent and opened; - to implement the monitoring of academic performance of teachers.

33) If you have internal regulations or guidelines, how are they organised? No, there are no special internal regulations / guidelines that oblige or expect new recruited teachers to be trained initial ly or to be engaged in programmes on continuing education. However in 2006-2007 the SU-HSE realized the Innovation Education Programme aimed to combine the education process, professional training and research activities. Evaluated on the basis of more then 40 indices (including the existence of research students laboratories, science published and on-line journals, participation of academic staff and students in basic and applied research projects, the usage of new technologies in teaching process, the level of R&D infrastructure development etc.) the SU-HSE has been selected as an innovation TEI among other TEIs – winners of the competition under the framework of the Priority national project „Education‟ in 2006-2007 (in 2006 17 winning innovation TEIs were selected and received financial support totalling 5 billion roubles (about 135 mln euros) from the federal budget; in 2007 20 billion roubles (about 540 mln euros) were allocated for 40 winning TEIs). In 2006 the SU-HSE was among 17 TEIs – winners of the first stage of competition for implementation of innovative education programmes. The common budget of the SU-HSE Innovation Education Programme in 2006-2007 was 556 mln roubles (76 % from the Federal budget, 24 % - co-financing from the SU-HSE budget). The qualification development of teachers was one of the main directions for the Innovation Education Programme in the SU-HSE (7.6% of Programme‟s budget was allocated for the qualification development; 23.2% - for infrastructure‟s development and labs equipment purchases; 69.2% - for software and methodical materials purchases and developments). The special Centre for Organization and Methodical Support of Qualification Development was created. In 2006-2007 about 350 proposals for qualification‟s development (including the participation in the international and nationa l conference, seminars, scholarships, creation of new education programmes etc.) were selected and financed on competition basis. About 2000 people (including teaching and administrative staff) have attended this initiative. Despite the absence of special internal regulations the development of qualification and lifelong learning of teachers are encouraged by the University. For example, the career development and continuing education are among the main criteria for consideration of proposals of teachers who obtain for labour contract prolongation and for academic increments (rewards for academic and research activities).

Page 3 (22 Points)

34) * Introduction: profile and context of the institution * Origin and initial steps of the QT initiative * Functioning of the QT initiative * Extension and sustainability of the QT initiative * Progress monitoring and assessment of the QT initiative * Synergy of the QT initiative * Additional comments (optional) * Confidentiality and further issues

35) What is the initiative?

Describe the QT initiative and give examples: Teachers ranking (Students assessments of teachers or students poll) Poll of students is held to get a fit back for further assessment and ranking of teachers. It aims at quality enhancement of teaching, recruitment procedures improvement, development of planning and organization of learning process. Results of ranking could be used as one of criteria for the teachers attestation process, eligibility and selection criteria to consider the teachers proposal for election for the academic position, delivering of personal еxtra compensation for academic performance. By initiative of the Rector‟s Office, Deans Offices or Office for learning and methodical support the University could hold more profound poll evaluating certain education programmes. Teachers ranking are implemented twice in an academic year after Autumn semester and Spring semester. Following criteria are used to identify students interest towards each discipline/education programme and to assess the content and methods of teaching: - logic and structure of education materials (lectures, seminars) etc. - clarity and legibility of teachers presentations - teacher‟s communication competencies (ability to contact with students)

- teacher‟s support to students (e.g. councelling, mentoring etc.) out of classes. The effectiveness/quality of teaching is evaluated on the basis on the 5-point scale. The structure and content of questionnaire are elaborated by the Working Group under supervision of the Dean of the Faculty of Sociology and submitted by the decision of the Rector‟s Office. Questionnaire is anonymous. The data are consolidated in an aggregated form and the results published in special Report. Deans Office prepare list of teachers to be included and assessed by means of a questionnaire in accordance with special guidelines no later than 10th of November and 15th of May. Deans of faculties are responsible for questionnaire full completion and accuracy. The Laboratory for Sociological Researches of the Faculty of Sociology prepares questionnaires and coordinates the overall process of the ranking implementation. Each faculty/department appoints the responsible for the ranking implementation at the faculty/department. Questionnaires are completed by students just before final assessment of students during the classes under supervision of students groups leaders. Progress monitoring and assessment of ranking is realized by the First Vice-Rector and the Office for learning and methodical support. The database is formed and results of students poll are analyzed by the Laboratory for Sociological Researches of the Faculty of Sociology. The results are published in the Report that put at disposal of the Rector‟s Office, Deans Offices and the Office for learning and methodical support. The Report includes not only the quantitative standardized evaluation of teachers by students, but also verbal recommendations and suggestions of students concerning the organization of learning process and learning environment.

36) What was the origin of the QT Initiative? Internal (stragtegy, new types of teaching) (0)

37) Comments The assessment of teachers performance coincided with the transformation of the SU-HSE into a new type of university in 1995 (the Higher School of Economics was initially created as a centre of masters programmes in 1992 and got the status of an University in 1995). This initiative corresponds with the main University‟s principles, including: - use and development of the forward Social and Economical knowledge; - multidisiplinarity; - bridging educational and research activities; - linking the learning process with the practical reforms; - participation in the regional development. The SU-HSE was one of the first Russian university introduced the system of teachers assessment.

38) Who prompted the QT initiative within the institution? Leadership at school or faculty level (0)

39) Additional comments? Leadership at school or faculty level: teachers ranking is mainly the HSE Rector Academic Council initiative the initiative of the Rector and University Academic Council

40) Has the QT initiative... Been implemented for more than 3 years (0)

41) How would you describe the QT initiative?

Experimental no

Established yes

42) Does it aim at: Enhancing the quality of the teaching (0) Assessing the quality of the teaching (0) Helping teachers to teach efficiently (0)

43) What is the level of concern regarding the objectives of the QT initiative?

1 is high 4 is low

9

For the Institution 2

For teachers 1

For students 2

44) Is the QT initiative locally implemented(within a faculty or a department or at lower level)? This QT initiative is realized by the Laboratory for Sociological Researches of the Faculty of Sociology but it covers all faculties. All faculties are participating in this QT initiative.

45) Is the QT initiative disseminated (over several departments, faculties or concerns the whole institution)? This QT initiative is disseminated all over the faculties of Moscow hosting university and its regional branches in Saint-Petersburg, Nizhny Novgorod and Perm

46) What is the exact timeline of the QT initiative?

Teachers ranking are implemented twice in an academic year after Autumn semester and Spring semester.

47) Who is dedicated to the project (position, type, number of staff concerned) and how is it done? The First Vice-rector is responsible for teachers ranking implementation and represents the University Administration as a main beneficiaries of this initiative. The Director of the Laboratory for Sociological Researches of the Faculty of Sociology is responsible for realization of overall process of teachers ranking (data collection, database creation, analysis and publication) Researchers of the Laboratory for Sociological Researches, post-graduate students and some administrative staff (but not students themselves) of the Faculty of Sociology participate in the database creation and data analysis process (about 5-6 persons). There is also one member of each faculty/department administration responsible for organization (data collection, work with students) of teachers ranking at each faculty/department. Following faculties/departments hold the poll of students (in parentheses the position of responsible is indicated): - Faculty of Economics (Head of Department of Coordination of Education Process) - Faculty of Management (Head of the Office of Bachelor Programmes) - Faculty of Sociology (Deputy Head of the Office of Studies) - Faculty of Law (Head of the Office of Studies) - Faculty of Applied Political Sciences (Dean Assistant) - Department of Business and Political Journalism (Deputy Head of the Office of Studies) - Faculty of Business-IT (Engineer – in – Chief of the Office of Studies) - Department of Applied Mathematics (Head of the Office of Studies) - Department of Engineering (Head of the Office of Studies) - Faculty of World Economy and International Affaires (Engineer – in - Chief of the Office of Studies) - Faculty of Psychology (Engineer – in - Chief of the Office of Studies) - Faculty of Public and Municipal Administration (Head of the Office of Studies) - Faculty of Philosophy (Head of the Office of Studies) - International College of Economics and Finance (Deputy Director for Academic Affaires) - Chair of Higher Mathematics (Head of Chair) - Chair of German (Engineer – in – Chief of Chair) - Chair of French (Senior Laboratory Assistant) Total number of staff involved in this QT initiative implementation is about 20 persons. Finally students themselves assess teachers performance as well as a whole education process and some educational programmes in particular.

48) Does your institution have a specific body/committee/postholder that centalises or monitors or coordinates the support to the QT initiative? Yes, the Laboratory for Sociological Researches of the Faculty of Sociology which is responsible for realization of all process of teachers ranking, but it is not its unique function.

49) What is the target audience of the QT initiative? The target audience represent the beneficiaries, those who are directly concerned and involved by the QT initiative

1 is high 4 is low

New teachers 1

Current teachers 1

Bachelor students 1

Master students 3

Doctoral students 4

Administrative staff 2

Leaders of the institution 1

Employers 4

50) How many people have attended and which departments have participated (as beneficiaries) in the QT initiative so far? Following faculties/departments are participating in the teachers ranking: - Faculty of Economics - Faculty of Management - Faculty of Sociology - Faculty of Law - Faculty of Applied Political Sciences - Department of Business and Political Journalism - Faculty of Business-IT - Department of Applied Mathematics - Department of Engineering - Faculty of World Economy and International Affaires - Faculty of Psychology - Faculty of Public and Municipal Administration - Faculty of Philosophy - International College of Economics and Finance - Chair of Higher Mathematics - Chair of German - Chair of French

51) If individual teachers have been launching their own QT initiative, to what extent does the institution support, monitor and/or reward these initiatives? It is not an individual but institutional initiative. See next question

52) If your institution or department has launched the QT initiative, what are the tools and procedures used to make such initiatives attractive to a potential audience? Results of ranking are used for academic career development of teachers (as criteria for attestation of teachers, eligibility and selection criteria to consider the teachers proposal for election for the academic position and delivering of personal еxtra compensation for academic performance). The results are published in the Report that put at disposal of the Rector‟s Office, Deans Offices and the Office for learning and methodical support. The results are discussed at Academic Councils meetings at the institution and faculty/department levels.

53) To what extent the QT initiative has enhanced or clarified the linkage between research activities and teaching activities in the institution? The realization of teachers ranking is clarified in full measure the linkage between the education and research process. The teachers ranking implementation is a sociological research in which different stakeholders (students, teachers, researchers and administration staff) are involved.

54) Is there a willingness of the institution to extend the QT initiative? Yes, the SU-HSE is interested in the extension of this QT initiative by expanding it at new faculties/departments as well as at regional branches Saint-Petersburg, Nizhny Novgorod and Perm.

55) How has the institution extended, disseminated or permeated the QT initiative in-house? Heads of other departments (which are not participating in the poll yet) could initiate such questioning in their structural bodies and could receive the necessary organization and methodical support. They could modify partly the content of the questionnaire in accordance with specific needs of their departments.

56) What are the major challenges the QT initiative promoters will have to anticipate, or had to anticipate, in

11

order to succeed? Not obligatory (facultative) status of the questionnaire and little percentage of students responses gathered, incompleteness and underrepresentativeness of data. Subjectivity of assessment. Complexity of questionnaire (for replay to this challenge the content of questionnaire was simplified by reducing the number of questions and criteria for assessment). Insufficient impact on affecting teachers‟ career progression and promoting scholarship and research on teachers.

57) In what ways, does your institution encourage discussion of the impacts and the appraisal of the efficiency of the QT initiative? Results of teachers ranking are discussed at the University‟s Academic Council and Faculties Academic Council meetings.

58) How is the QT initiative funded?

special external money, internal resource, amount... Yes, the teachers ranking implementation is funded from internal resource. The amount of funding of Faculties responsibles work depends on the faculty size and the number of students interrogated (it is about from 2 000 to 7 000 roubles (70-200 euros) for each cycle of ranking). The database forming (Working group activities) costs around 60 000 roubles (1700 euros).

59) How does your institution foresee the next steps for the future of the QT initiative? The special Analytical Centre is created for an in–depth analysis of data of teachers ranking (among other functions) to improve the SU-HSE quality culture strategy.

60) Additionally, what could be done to lead the QT initiative to greater success? In-depth analysis of data. Use of results of the ranking for teachers‟ career progression and promoting scholarship and research on teachers. More attractiveness of the poll to student as well for teachers through the open discussion of ranking results.

61) What are the mechanisms/indicators implemented by the institution to follow-up on the progress of the QT intiative? Progress monitoring and assessment of ranking is realized by the First Vice-Rector for learning process and the Office for learning and methodical support.

62) What is measured when assessing or monitoring the QT initiative? The representativeness of data delivered by participating faculties/departments The number of teachers with score less than 3 (out of 5 possible points). The goal of the University – the reduction of number of teachers with score less than 3 and growth in number of teachers with score 4 and more.

63) The people who are in charge of the implementation of the QT intiative, who are they accountable to? People responsible for the ranking implementation at the faculty/department are accountable to the Dean of faculty / Head of department. People responsible for the database forming, synthesis and analysis of data (Working group) are accountable to the Head of the Laboratory for Sociological Researches of the Faculty of Sociology. Head of the Laboratory for Sociological Researches of the Faculty of Sociology, coordinating all process of teachers ranking implementation is accountable to the First Vice-Rector (responsible for the learning process).

64) Who are responsible for taking stock of the QT intiative's progression and of it's outputs? 1) The people in charge of QT implementation? yes

65) 3) The administration support? yes

66) What criteria did your institution chose to evaluate the success of the QT intiative? Please give examples of the criteria. The representativeness of data delivered by participating faculties/departments Rate of students participation The share (percentage) of students responses gathered

67) Please give examples of yardsticks or standards to be reached The goal of the University – the reduction of number of teachers with score less than 3 and growth in number of teachers with score 4 and more.

68) To date, what are the main consequences for the teachers and the students of the QT initiative? For teachers there is the possibility: - to compare and to improve the professional qualification - to enhance the effectiveness of teaching process - for professional development to pedagogy(pedagogical tools, teachers behaviour and attitudes); - to pass the formal attestation and to prolong the academic contract; - to receive the personal еxtra compensation for academic performance; - for progression of academic career. For students there is the possibility: - to be heard their opinion and to translate their recommendations, suggestions and learning needs; - to be involved in quality assurance process and improvement of the education process; - to improve learning environment and conditions.

69) 2) Student services?

b. Student services:… To respond to students needs indicated during the students poll the University created two main support bodies for students and graduates: - The Office for out-of-classes work with students is created to deliver the social provision for students, to support the creation of students associations, to guide the career prospects, for mentoring and psychological support. - The Office for career developments and cooperation with graduates has been created to provide career advice, monitoring and analysis of career developments of graduates, support of communication and professional contacts of graduates, as well as to organize the cooperation with employers.

70) 3) Staff development policies? c. Staff development policies: Results of ranking are used as one of criteria among others for attestation of teachers, evaluation of teacher‟s proposal during the election for the position and for delivering of personal еxtra compensation for academic performance (See QT initiative 2).

71) 4) Estate, space and building strategies? d. Estate and space and building strategies: University‟s administration considers students suggestions and recommendations regarding the organization of learning process and learning environment during the planning and implementation of the space and building strategies. For example, the multiplicity of educations buildings and students dormitories diffused across Moscow city (the SU-HSE is located in 26 buildings in different Moscow districts) is a real problem for most students and teachers, indicated during the students poll . To address this need the SU-HSE Administration is constructing now a big University complex, including campus in Moscow region (Troitsk) which is expected to integrate the overall learning process.

72) 5) Others? e. Others? :……… Consulting and monitoring policies: The insufficiency of ranking results analysis and an insufficient impact of teachers ranking on the academic career development and research activities is stimulating the creation of a new Analytical Centre one of task of which is an in-depth analysis of teachers ranking.

13

73) Could you give examples of tools or practices that ensure the coherence amongst the various QT intiatives that many occur simultaneously?

QT initiatives described in this questionnaire are linked closely and could used simultaneously. For example: Results of ranking could be used as one of criteria for attestation of teachers, election or re-election for the academic position, delivering of personal еxtra compensation for academic performance. The implementation of teachers ranking as well as the functioning of business partner chairs (the creation of linkages with business and industry sectors, recruitment for teaching of highly-qualified, practicing specialists from the state management agencies, as well as from commercial and non-commercial organizations in science and business) are used by the SU-HSE as indicators of innovation and high-quality education to fundraise, to participate in contestations and to receive extra-funding for realization research and practical projects.

74) Could you give examples of impact of the QT intiatives that concern other domains than solely teaching (eg. on teachers mobility, on research activities...)? Teachers ranking concerns directly the teachers development career and improvement of professional qualification. The results of teachers ranking are used as the eligibility and selection criteria to consider the proposal of teacher to financial support of his academic mobility (participation at conference, scholarships etc.)

75) Within the institution, how is the QT intiative articulated with other initiatives undertaken by other departments, by senior decision-making bodies, by committees and by other individuals? See question 56 (this is question 59).

76) Outside the institution, how is the QT intiative articulated with other initiatives undertaken by other departments, by senior decision-making bodies, by committees and by other individuals? All institutional initiatives aimed at quality assurance and enhancement are developed and supported in the common framework of national education policy. The quality assurance of tertiary education is one of key priorities of the education system development in the Russian Federation, approved by the RF Ministry for Education in 2005 and included in the Concept of modernization of Russian education (other key priorities are: development of a modern system of lifelong learning in professional education, ensuring the accessibility of high-quality secondary education and enhancing the investment climate in education). The quality assurance of tertiary education including the quality of teaching mentioned is also as a main goal into the Concept for modernization of Russian education until 2010 ( (approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation on December 29, 2001, No. 1756-r) The development of the system of quality assurance of education services is also one of the main objectives of the Federal Target Education Development Programme in 2006-2010 (adopted in accordance with the Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation, dated December 23, 2005. No. 803). This goal suggests the solution of the following tasks: - improvement of state assessment of activities of education institutions and organizations; - development of new forms and mechanisms of quality assessment and monitoring in education institutions; - completion of experimental form of schools leavers assessment (Unified State Exam is a test-based form of state examination of school-graduates; it will be common wide-spread form of schools results); - creation of the All Russia system of education quality assessment.

77) Could you give examples of how your institution makes sure that the QT initiative is articulated with the strategy or the key objectives of the institution?

The goal of high quality of teaching and learning process and the importance of such quality assurance instrument as teachers ranking is fixed among other principal goals in the “Concept of the SU-HSE development in the period to 2010” (accepted in August 2004) and in the University Charter. The realizations of such progressive quality assessment initiative is used by the SU-HSE among other arguments in fundraising process (for preparation of University proposals to participate in contestations hold by Federal ministries and agencies to receive extra-funding for realization research and practical projects). For example, the SU-HSE mentioned this initiative in the proposal for competition “Innovation Education Programme” realizing under the framework of the Priority national project „Education‟. The SU-HSE gained this competition in 2006 and received about 423 mln roubles (about 12 mln euros) for realization of the Innovation Education Programme in 2006-2007 (See Question 26).

78) Is the QT initiative part of, or, an incentive, to build a 'quality culture' in your institution? yes

79) To some extent, is the QT initiative bound to a specific identity of your institution? Yes, this QT initiative is a part and a feature of the SU-HSE seeking for the status of innovation and high quality research, internationally recognized university fully integrated into the European and wider international education and research area.

80) Is the QT initiative part of the promotion of the institution? Yes, see Questions 61. (this is 64)

Page 4 (25 Points)

81) What is the initiative? Describe the QT initiative and give examples: Extra compensation for academic performance (ECAP) initiative ECAP is additional increase in regular monthly paid salary by a certain amount defined by the committee which depends on the estimated level of research achievements showed in publications. ECAPs main goal is to encourage research activity of the academic staff. Creation of the special fund to stimulate research activity. ECAPs initiative is functioning of the basis of the Statement on Extra Compensation for Academic Performance. ECAPs extension and sustainability depends on annual financial capacities. ECAPS fund is annually provided by the decision of the HSE governance. The ECAPs monitoring and assessment is provided by the HSE division on academic (fundamental) research. Currently more than 40 per cent of the university academic staff also conduct research and the average level in the country HEIs academic involvement in research is about 16 per cent. The high percentage of the HSE staff research activity can‟t referred to the ECAP only by it is supposed that ECAPs impact is significant.

82) What was the origin of the QT Initiative? Internal (stragtegy, new types of teaching) (0)

83) Other examples? ECAP is a part of the university strategy to stimulate fundamental research activity of the internal (full-time and part-time) teaching staff

84) Who prompted the QT initiative with the institution? Leadership at school or faculty level (0)

85) Additional comments? ECAP is mainly the HSE Rector Academic Council initiative

86) Has the QT initiative... Been implemented for less than 3 years (0)


Experimental no

Established yes

88) Another description? It have been proven to be effective, clear and accountable

89) Does it aim at: Enhancing the quality of the teaching (0) Rewarding teachers that commit themselves to QT (0) Affecting teachers career progression (0)

15

Promoting scholarship and research on teachers (0)


1 is high 4 is low


For teachers 1

For students 1

91) Is the QT initiative locally implemented(within a faculty or a department or at lower level)? ECAP is implemented to all Internal teaching staff, including lectures and researchers (full-time and part-time - who teach no less then one quarter of working time).

92) Is the QT initiative disseminated (over several departments, faculties or concerns the whole institution)? This QT initiative is disseminated all over the faculties of Moscow hosting university and its regional branches in Saint-Petersburg, Nizhny Novgorod and Perm.

93) What is the exact timeline of the QT initiative? ECAP is initiated on the annual basis and last during one year in each individual case.

94) Who is dedicated to the project (position, type, number of staff concerned) and how is it done? The Rector is the main engine of the ECAP initiative

95) Does your institution have a specific body/committee/postholder that centalises or monitors or coordinates the support to the QT initiative?

Yes, it is the Academic extra compensation committee

96) What is the target audience (beneficiaries) of the QT initiative?

1 is high 4 is low

New teachers 3

Current teachers 1

Bachelor students 4

Master students 3

Doctoral students 2



Employers 4

97) How many people have attended and which departments have participated (as beneficiaries) in the QT initiative so far? All HSE departments participate. About 180 persons (near 15 per cent of internal academic staff).

98) If individual teachers have been launching their own QT initiative, to what extent does the institution support, monitor and/or reward these initiatives?

It is not an individual but institutional initiative. See next question

99) If your institution or department has launched the QT initiative, what are the tools and procedures used to make such initiatives attractive to a potential audience? The level of compensation is big enough to be compared with the contract salary.

100) To what extent the QT initiative has enhanced or clarified the linkage between the research activities and the teaching activities in the institution? In the ECAP case the linkage is direct

101) Is there a willingness of the institution to extend the QT initiative? ECAP is institutionalized already

102) How has the institution extended, disseminated or permeated the QT initiative in-house?

This QT initiative is disseminated all over the faculties of Moscow hosting university and its regional branches in Saint-Petersburg, Nizhny Novgorod and Perm

103) What are the major challenges the QT initiative promoters will have to anticipate, or had to anticipate, in order to succeed? - Difficulty of achieving of the teacher‟s working time balance between teaching and researching activities - Current shortage of criteria for academic performance assessment (now it is limited mainly by the list of publications) and the necessity to enlarge the list of criteria (e.g. participation in research projects and their effectiveness, tutoring of young researchers etc.) - Low impact on education quality assessment and the necessity to include the impact of teacher‟s research activities on teaching process as a criteria into the call for proposals documentation. - Limited founding of this QT initiative (now limited by internal resources) and the necessity to find resources for co-financing.

104) In what ways, does your institution encourage discussion of the impacts and the appraisal of the efficiency of the QT initiative? Results and growth trends of ECAP are discussed during the University/ Faculties Academic Council meetings.

105) How is the QT initiative funded?

special external money, internal resource, amount... ECAP is funded from sources others than the federal budget (internal resources).

106) How does your institution foresee the next steps for the future of the QT initiative?

The SU-HSE is planning to enlarge the list of criteria for academic performance assessment, sources of funding and the number of professors and researchers participating in the competition and receiving ECAP.

107) Additionally, what could be done to lead the QT initiative to greater success?

It is believed that ECAP is more or less stable and constant part of the HSE policy.

108) What are the mechanisms/indicators implemented by the institution to follow-up on the progress of the QT intiative? The Vice-Rector on Research office is in charge of monitoring of the ECAP.

109) What is measured when assessing or monitoring the QT intiative? The quality and quantity of publications The number of academic staff doing research

110) The people who are in charge of the implementation of the QT intiative, who are they accountable to? Vice – Rector on research reports to the Rector, Academic Council and Academic Supervisor of the HSE

111) Who are responsible for taking stock of the QT intiative's progression and of it's outputs? The people in charge of QT implementation? yes

112) What criteria did your institution chose to evaluate the success of the QT intiative? Please give examples of the criteria. Percentage of internal (full-time and part-time) academic staff involved in research activity

113) Please give examples of yardsticks or standards to be reached. Number of research publications

17

114) To date, what are the main consequences for the teachers and the students of the QT intiative? Teachers increased and modeified curricular while students have more opportunity to participate in research assistance

115) Staff development policies?

yes

116) Could you give examples of tools or practices that ensure the coherence amongst the various QT intiatives that many occur simultaneously? The stimulation of research activities of academic staff has a direct impact on the accreditation process of the SU-HSE education programmes. The SU-HSE uses the information on research projects implemented by the University for the last 5 years and information on monographs published by the University for the last 5 years as accreditation criteria (among others) during self-evaluation and peer-review process (for the preparation of the Report of some education programmes of a TEI – So-called „the module of collection of the data on learning conditions for some education programmes‟). (See Question 16)

117) Could you give examples of impact of the QT intiatives that concern other domains than solely teaching (eg. on teachers mobility, on research activities...)? This QT initiative concerns directly research activities. Teachers could enrich their lectures by their researches results. They could also significantly improve their pedagogy practices and communication with students by involving students into research projects realization.

118) Within the institution, how is the QT intiative articulated with other initiatives undertaken by other departments, by senior decision-making bodies, by committees and by other individuals? For example, this QT is articulated with the research strand of the Innovation Education Programme, implemented by the SU-HSE in 2006-2007 (See Question 26). 20 newly established unites were included into the university educational - research division : 11 laboratories, 2 business partner chairs (The chair of Innovative practice of marketing communications established jointly with WPP/VideoInternational and another one with Oracle) (See QT initiative 3), 3 interdisciplinary educational - research centres (On Public Governance, Foresight-Centre, Centre for Complex European and International Studies). The HSE Centre for Advanced Studies has been established on the basis of the HSE Centre for Economic Policy in collaboration with the New Economic School. 40 big research projects conducted in the research strand framework have created significant outputs. More than 500 students were involved in research activity.

119) Outside the institution, how is the QT intiative articulated with other initiatives undertaken by other departments, by senior decision-making bodies, by committees and by other individuals?

The Russian system of tertiary education possesses significant scientific and innovation potential, as well as long-standing traditions of participation in research activity. Nevertheless, it does not yet play a key role in the development of the scientific and research complex, and the innovation system as a whole. The current state of science done by research universities and other education institutions in many ways can be explained by the heritage and traditions of the Soviet period, during which science was to a significant degree separated from higher education, with the exception of a relatively small number of leading TEIs. In recent years the situation surrounding TEI‟s R&D activities has gradually stabilized and some progress has achieved. The number of TEIs having research departments has grown, as well as the number of academic staff involved in R&D. The problems concerning the process of building up R&D in HEIs are in the focus of the state policy now. The research activity of academic staff, joint implementation of fundamental and applied researches by professors, young researchers and students, creation of research laboratories for such cooperation are integral parts of teaching process and principal criteria foe quality assessment. The realization of TEIs innovation programmes combining learning and research process is one of the main directions of innovation activities implementation in the Russian Federation (See e.g. the Question 26 about the SU-HSE Innovation Education Programmes realized under the framework of the Priority national project „Education‟ in 2006-2007). The development of thoroughly comprehensive and balanced approaches to the state policy on science, innovation and education reflected in a series of strategic documents and action plans started in Russia in the last few years. The objective of strengthening the state support to R&D activities provided by TEIs was included in the Programme of Social and Economic Development of the Russian Federation in the Mid-Term (2005-2008), as well as in strategic documents on development of science and innovation as one of the key objectives. The long-term steps on the development of R&D activities in TEIs stipulated by the “Strategy for the Development of Science and Innovation in the Russian Federation until 2015” (2006) for coming two years, include: • support for development of the affiliated departments of leading TEIs within the structure of academic institutions, as wel l as the industry-oriented labs in TEIs; expansion of the practice of students‟ internships;

• the allocation of funds for the acquisition of research equipment for TEIs on competitive basis; • support for Russian research and pedagogy collectives, the development of mechanisms for the functioning of distributed science schools; • the allocation of research grants to young scholars and professors; • the development of special support programme designed for young research teams and students‟ design bureaux in TEIs, as well as research projects implemented by young scholars and creative teams headed by young researchers (this must facilitate the attractiveness of research activity for young scholars and researchers); • the creation and support of integrated research and education structures, intra-university and inter-university complexes, centres combining research, education and industry activities; and the development the system of research and education centres affiliated to major HEIs; • support for patenting the results of intellectual activity by public research (scientific) and education institutions; • education and training for the sector of innovation and development of skills in innovation management; • development of the system of PhD (aspirantura) and doctorate studies. The practical implementation of this priority support for TEI‟s research and innovation activity are implemented within the framework of federal targeted programmes: until 2007 - The federal targeted science and technology programme; from 2008 - the new programme “Research and development in priority areas of development of the Russian science and technology complex” for the period 2007-2012. By implementing these measures the State expects to increase the share of universities in science and innovation complex to a level typical for the main developed countries in coming 5-7 years.

120) Could you give examples of how your institution makes sure that the QT initiative is articulated with the strategy or the key objectives of the institution? The ECAP contribute to the strategy aime at the development of the HSE into the research university type.

121) Is the QT initiative part of, or, an incentive, to build a 'quality culture' in your institution?

Yes, as far as the quality of teaching is supported by the quality of research.

122) To some extent, is the QT initiative bound to a specific identity of your institution? ECAP is clearly bound to the image of the SU - HSE as a research-driven university.

123) Is the QT initiative part of the promotion of the institution?

Yes, this QT initiative is a part and a feature of the SU-HSE seeking for the status of innovation and high quality research, internationally recognized university fully integrated into the European and wider international education and research area.

Page 5 (28 Points)

124) What is the initiative? Describe the QT initiative and give examples: Business partner chairs Basic partner chairs (BPC) are an important element of the SU-HSE innovative structure. They are created as structural subdivisions of the SU-HSE, for the purposes of developing the education process and recruiting as teachers highly-qualified, practicing specialists from governmental agencies, commercial and non-commercial organizations in business and research. The main tasks of a BPC are: • to introduce the latest achievements in science and modern practices to the educational process; • to organize and conduct innovative courses in topical problems of science, economics and social policy, state management and business, by leading specialists and practitioners in the corresponding fields; • to develop scientific research work in the field of activity of a University department, engaging undergraduate and postgraduate students, and teaching; • to conduct systematic work for professional orientation of students. The main functions of a BPC are: • organization of original academic courses; • organization of master classes and group consultations with students; • conducting individual consultations with students; • development of new syllabi and materials; • participation in the work of the State Examination Commissions; • conducting professional training events for students; • organization of practical work for students in partner organizations with appropriate activity profile; • recruiting undergraduate and postgraduate students, and faculty, to implement research and applied analytical projects together with the partner organizations; • organization of seminars, round tables and conferences;

19

• compiling preprints of scientific papers, reports, manuals and textbooks. There are 15 BPCs in the SU-HSE at present, among them the Chairs of Applied Microeconomics, Theory of Business-Government Relations, Legal Support for Reforms, and a number of chairs of major Russian (WPP/Video-International, 1С) and international companies (IBM; Microsoft; Oracle, White&Case), as well as state bodies (The Federal Antimonopoly Service of the RF).

125) What was the origin of the QT Initiative?

Internal (stragtegy, new types of teaching) (0) External (law, regulation, quality assurance process, accountability...) (0)

126) Other examples?

a. Internal (strategy, new types of teaching…): BPC is a part of the university strategy to develop the educational process and bring it close to practice. b. External (law, regulation, quality assurance process, accountability…): The BPC model was taken after the leading technical universities, the first of which was the Physical-Technical University in Moscow. Comments: The SU-HSE was the first non-technical university in Russia to create the system of BPCs.

127) Who prompted the QT initiative with the institution? Leadership at school or faculty level (0)

128) Additional comments?

Leadership at school or faculty level: BPC is mainly the HSE Rector and Academic Council initiative

129) Has the QT initiative... Been implemented for more than 3 years (0)


Experimental yes

Established yes

131) Another description? Comments: BPC practice is established in the leading universities in departments of natural and technical sciences, its introduction is experimental for universities in social and economic sciences.

132) Does it aim at: Enhancing the quality of the teaching (0) Helping teachers to teach efficiently (0)

133) Other aims? Relating teaching to professional practice and developing new applied competencies in students.


1 is high 4 is low


For teachers 3

For students 4

135) Additional concerns?

For teachers: 3 (apart from BPC teachers)

136) Is the QT initiative locally implemented(within a faculty or a department or at lower level)? Some BPCs are formed at a department, some are cross-departmental.

137) Is the QT initiative disseminated (over several departments, faculties or concerns the whole institution)? The first BPCs were formed at the main SU-HSE Departments – of Economics, then the initiative was disseminated over other departments, and interdepartmental chairs of this kind have also appeared.

138) What is the exact timeline of the QT initiative? The initiative is actively developing – it is planned that by the year 2020 BPCs will constitute 20% of all chairs at the University (now 12%).

139) Who is dedicated to the project (position, type, number of staff concerned) and how is it done? The BPCs are chaired by the leaders and top staff of business companies, government agencies and analytical centers. For example, the Head of the BPC “1C” is the Director of the corresponding company “1C”, which is the market leader in financial software and databases. All teachers of BPCs work in the SU-HSE part-time and combine their activities with work for the basic partner organization that has established the BPC. Each chair has also regular auxiliary staff.

140) Does your institution have a specific body/committee/postholder that centalises or monitors or coordinates the support to the QT initiative? No specific body.

141) What is the target audience (beneficiaries) of the QT initiative?

1 is high 4 is low

New teachers 3

Current teachers 3

Bachelor students 1

Master students 1

Doctoral students 2



Employers 1

142) How many people have attended and which departments have participated (as beneficiaries) in the QT initiative so far? All basic departments - of Economics, Management, Sociology, IT for Business, Public Administration, Law. There are also cross-departmental BPCs.

143) If individual teachers have been launching their own QT initiative, to what extent does the institution support, monitor and/or reward these initiatives? Individual initiatives to open a new BPC are highly supported. It can be an initiative from a department, sometimes it comes from a partner company.

144) If your institution or department has launched the QT initiative, what are the tools and procedures used to make such initiatives attractive to a potential audience? BPC is very attractive to students as it gives them a chance to get involved in advanced research which has direct relation to modern economy, government or business developments, and sometimes – to find a future job. The BPCs describe their activities at the University Internet portal, most of them have their own web sites, they make presentations for students, publish leaflets, advertise master classes, etc.

145) To what extent the QT initiative has enhanced or clarified the linkage between the research activities and the teaching activities in the institution? The BPC initiative has to a great extent enhanced the linkage between research and teaching activities, as the teachers, who are at the same time experts and researchers in the leading Russian companies and top structures, write and introduce new courses, cases, textbooks for students, enriching the social and economic theory with their practical experience.

146) Is there a willingness of the institution to extend the QT initiative? The initiative is extended –two new BPCs were opened in 2007 and one since the beginning of 2008. It is planned to bring the number of BPCs to 20% of all chairs.

21

147) How has the institution extended, disseminated or permeated the QT initiative in-house? The first basic chairs were formed at the main SU-HSE department – of Economics, then the initiative was disseminated over other departments, and cross-departmental chairs of this kind appeared.

148) What are the major challenges the QT initiative promoters will have to anticipate, or had to anticipate, in order to succeed? It is necessary to monitor closely the BPCs work in order to avoid a situation when the basic partner company can use the students to make chore work for the company without connection to the educational process.

149) In what ways, does your institution encourage discussion of the impacts and the appraisal of the efficiency of the QT initiative? The initiative is discussed at the meetings of the departments staff, of the Academic Council, at the Forum of the web-sites. It is also discussed at seminars and conferences devoted to educational innovations with participation of other universities of Russia and possible employers.

150) How is the QT initiative funded? special external money, internal resource, amount... The activities of BPCs are funded from the central University budget – about 30 000 Euro per chair per year. Additionally, external resources are involved, as often the partner organizations and companies are sending their representatives for free to lecture and conduct master classes. In 2006-2007 BPCs were partially financed from the RF state budget in frames of the State Priority Project “Education” as part of the SU-HSE Innovative Programme.

151) How does your institution foresee the next steps for the future of the QT initiative? It is planned to transfer part of the BPCs educational activities to the basic partner organizations proper. It will enable students to acquire new competencies in the regime of actual business processes. It is possible to organize training of some teachers on the base of partner organizations as well.

152) Additionally, what could be done to lead the QT initiative to greater success?

It is possible to form at each department Employers‟ Councils in order to ensure topicality of professional competencies of students and graduates.

153) What are the mechanisms/indicators implemented by the institution to follow-up on the progress of the QT intiative? BPCs submit regular reports on their activities, using the same pattern and schedule as other chairs.

154) What is measured when assessing or monitoring the QT intiative? The number of students attending the chair The quality and quantity of developed teaching materials (courses, readers, case-studies, etc.) The number of specialists from partner organizations involved The number of organized master classes, seminars, etc.

155) The people who are in charge of the implementation of the QT intiative, who are they accountable to?

Chairs report to Heads of Departments. They, in their turn, are accountable to the Vice – Rector, supervising the work of BPCs and the Academic Council.

156) Who are responsible for taking stock of the QT intiative's progression and of it's outputs?

The people in charge of QT implementation? Heads of BPCs, Heads of Departments, Vice-Rector

157) The administration support?

The Academic Methodological Department

158) What criteria did your institution chose to evaluate the success of the QT intiative? Please give examples of the criteria. The number of courses developed by BPC The number of post-graduates who come to work to the company who takes part the BPC activities. And more generally –

The number of post-graduates who start to work according to their specialization the first year after graduating.

159) Please give examples of yardsticks or standards to be reached.

The planned number of post-graduates who start to work according to their specialization the first year after graduating – 80%.

160) To date, what are the main consequences for the teachers and the students of the QT intiative?

Teachers increase and modify curricular while students have more opportunity to participate in applied research projects and develop competences requested by the governmental structures and leading companies for their staff.

161) Staff development policies?

BPCs enrich the faculty with highly qualified specialists from the leading sectors of Russian economy and government.

162) Estate, space and building strategies? In the situation of lack of space part of the teaching process can be transferred to a basic partner organization.

163) Could you give examples of tools or practices that ensure the coherence amongst the various QT intiatives that many occur simultaneously? The BPC practices are often similar and interconnected with another SU-HSE QT initiative – “scientific-educational” and “project-educational” laboratories, representing groups of researchers of various background, from junior students to professors. The network of laboratories is also connected with the leading companies, analytical centers and governmental bodies.

164) Could you give examples of impact of the QT intiatives that concern other domains than solely teaching (eg. on teachers mobility, on research activities...)? Besides new methods of teaching, BPC develops applied research and helps students to find a job after graduating.

165) Within the institution, how is the QT intiative articulated with other initiatives undertaken by other departments, by senior decision-making bodies, by committees and by other individuals? It is planned that strategic partners (and employers) will participate in the University management via membership in the Board and peer review committees (to be created) on major research areas.

166) Outside the institution, how is the QT intiative articulated with other initiatives undertaken by other departments, by senior decision-making bodies, by committees and by other individuals? see previous question

167) Could you give examples of how your institution makes sure that the QT initiative is articulated with the strategy or the key objectives of the institution? The Strategy of SU-HSE Development till 2010 (adopted in 2004) articulated creation of BPCs as one of the key issues, first of all, at the departments of Economics and Public Government. The draft of the SU-HSE Strategy till 2020 stresses the need to found new BPCs, and to shift the BPC structures to partner organizations themselves.

168) Is the QT initiative part of, or, an incentive, to build a 'quality culture' in your institution? Bringing teachers and lecturers from such spheres as business and government is the base for external expertise of the quality of teaching, which is part of the “quality culture” at the University.

169) To some extent, is the QT initiative bound to a specific identity of your institution? Being a well-developed system, it is a specific identity of the University.

170) Is the QT initiative part of the promotion of the institution? It is a model for other universities and departments in social and economic sciences.

Page 7 (0 Points)

171) Would you permit reference to your institutional illustrations in the report?

23

Yes (0)

172) Would you allow the institutional illustrations to be quoted in the report or in an annex? Yes (0)

173) Would you like the institutional illustrations to be part of the annex of the report on the IMHE-OECD website? Yes (0)

174) Would you like to be contacted to have further discussions on the topic?

Yes (0)

175) Would you like to participate in the in-depth analysis for the second phase of this project? Yes (0)

5) name of the hei the state university higher school of ... · 5) name of the hei the state...

Documents