The article explores European experience in optimisation of higher education institutions network, provides theoretical background for the above process and identifies its key features, as well as formulates practical recommendations for implementation of Ukraine’s higher education sector optimisation. The relevance of this research is conditioned by ongoing higher education reform, its strategic objectives, developments triggered by russian federation aggression, and objectives of post-war revival of Ukraine. The article is rooted in the experience and optimisation practices of 9 European countries: Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Ireland, Norway, Sweden and United Kingdom and identifies key specific features of higher education institutions network optimization in each of the above countries. The analysis of theoretical texts by foreign and domestic scholars, practical cases, analytical reports dedicated to university mergers and restructuring of the landscape of national higher education systems allowed to identify: terminology on the research topic (namely: amalgamations, mergers, concentration processes, clusters, alliances, collaborations, optimization of higher education institutions network); pre-conditions that trigger optimisation process (in the format of 5 pairs “reason — goal”); trends and approaches to optimisation implementation (8 trends including duration; diversification; dominance of vertical heterogenous amalgamations; pairing; positioning on higher education international arena; combination of bottom-up and top-down approaches; supporting role of the state; partnership and trust); factors that ensure success of optimisation efforts (presented in the form of three-level segmented pyramid with value, system and institutional dimensions). Practical recommendations formulated by the authors are the outcomes of adaptation of prominent European experience — its theoretical and practical domains — to the priorities, challenges and specific characteristics pertinent to the development of Ukraine’s higher educations.
The article is dedicated to the growing social role of universities under knowledge society and its revision during wartime and post-war revival. This role has not received due attention of Ukrainian scholars and higher education stakeholders; on the contrary, in western academic discourse university third mission (also referred to as social mission) is actively discussed and several studies on university roles during conflict and post-conflict recovery are available. The article aims at conceptualization of university third mission relevant for Ukraine’s higher education of today as the country is striving towards knowledge society, higher education modernization and its alignment with European Higher Education Area, as well as fighting against Russian Federation aggression and planning economic recovery and national revival. Knowledge is a key concept in interpretation and definitions of three university missions: knowledge is generated or produced via research (second mission); it is disseminated and promoted via teaching and learning (first mission); the essence of the third / social mission is to apply knowledge for problem-solving and general societal benefit. Application of knowledge is not limited to technological innovations and know-hows and covers social, humanitarian, cultural, business and entrepreneurship, economic, political and other domains. Knowledge is becoming the major problem-solving tool; and demand for knowledge is growing among different categories of knowledge workers engaged in problem definition, decision-making and implementation in different economic sectors and spheres of life. Problems and challenges incurred by war make them the most serious grievances of today’s Ukraine. Multiple challenges faced by Ukrainian society, economy, territories, industries will require the wisdom of all Ukrainian higher education institutions and knowledge workers and can only be addressed effectively via innovative approaches and mobilization of many partners: local and international, academic and non-academic, private and public, non-profit and commercial. Due to their specific features (multidiscipline expertise, access to international knowledge sharing and good practices exchange, non-profit focus, multiple perspectives and diversity of opinions), universities like no other institutions are well-positioned to establish and run partnerships, project consortia, lead innovation ecosystems, catalyse and contribute to reconstruction and revival processes.
The purpose of the article is to scrutinize and specify the semantics of English terms «appraisal», «assessment», «evaluation» and to identify their Ukrainian equivalents capable to adequately convey the meaning of above English words in Ukrainian educational discourse. The relevance of this theme is rooted in the growing interest to teaching and learning in general and, in this context, the facilitation of dialogue on importance of assessment / evaluation in higher education, unfolding over the last decade in European Higher Education Area. In Ukraine’s higher education, the discussion on the above issues was launched in 2020 within the framework of Ukraine Higher Education Teaching Excellence Programme that is a joint initiative of the British Council in Ukraine and the Institute of Higher Education of the National Academy of the Educational Sciences of Ukraine, in partnership with the Ministry of Higher Education and Science of Ukraine and National Agency for Higher Education Quality Assurance. The discussion has revealed that there is no unity among Ukraine’s higher education community regarding the semantics of two terms «assessment» and «evaluation»; that the meaning of «evaluation» is interpreted rather vaguely and that the Ukrainian language lacks lexemes capable to convey the specifics of the meanings of two English terms. Three methods – lexico-semantic analysis, discourse analysis and content-analysis – have been applied, which resulted in the following findings: three terms are regularly used in English expert and scholarly discourse to discuss the issues of assessment, evaluation, appraisal. The lexical-semantic analysis of the above terms has not revealed significant differences in their meanings, but contextually all three are used differently and convey different meanings; «assessment» is used to nominate an integral phase of teaching and learning and correlates with measuring learner’s attainment, progress, or achievement of learning outcomes; «evaluation» is used in a much broader context and examines the value of a study programme, quality of teaching or educational environment, success of educational policies etc.; two «agents» are involved in the assessment process: a teacher and a student (learner); and the subject matter that is assessed is either the process of learning or learning outcomes; the number of agents involved in evaluation is much broader: they could be students who are asked to express their opinion of the programme or module; teachers who review the programme that they have developed; external stakeholders invited to express their opinion on the relevance of competences acquired by students for the labour market or their judgement on the quality of education in a certain institution in general; the appraisal is used in connection to measuring HEIs’ staff competences and performance only. Following the analyses, the conclusion has been made that the absence of a Ukrainian term permitting to convey the meaning of «evaluation» in Ukrainian expert and scholarly discourse considerably restricts the discussion of assessment and evaluation in higher education and education in general on the national and institutional levels. The search for an appropriate Ukrainian equivalent and consent of Ukrainian higher education community to unanimously use a certain lexeme as an equivalent to the English term would significantly advance the discourse and facilitate the promotion and usage of evaluation practices and techniques in national higher education.
Методичні рекомендації «Оцінювання якості вищої освіти в умовах євроінтеграції» підготовлено за результатами виконання другого етапу наукової роботи за темою «Механізми оцінювання якості вищої освіти в умовах євроінтеграції» у відділі політики і врядування у вищій освіті Інституту вищої освіти НАПН України. На цьому етапі виконання наукової роботи перед колективом дослідників ставилося завдання розробити методичні рекомендації щодо оцінювання якості вищої освіти на основі аналізу відповідного міжнародного та вітчизняного досвіду. На основі аналізу міжнародного та вітчизняного досвіду оцінювання якості вищої освіти визначено та систематизовано підходи, складові, критерії, показники, індикатори тощо механізмів оцінювання якості вищої освіти, сформовано рекомендації щодо їх запровадження на національному та інституційному рівнях у системі вищої освіти України. Видання буде корисним для викладачів, дослідників, керівників закладів вищої освіти і здобувачів вищої освіти, а також інших зацікавлених осіб.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.