EMMC: Course management, visibility and sustainability

Ljubljana

EMAP Seminar, February 2012

Andries Verspeeten

International Relations Office – Ghent University

Course Management, Visibility, Sustainability Measures

Ghent University – International Relations Office Andries Verspeeten – EMAP Seminar

Presentation Outline

• Ghent University and Erasmus Mundus Action 1

• Course Management, visibility and sustainability

• Cooperation mechanisms

• Participation costs, Financial management

• Development and sustainability

• Promotion measures

• Some general observations


EMMCs at Ghent University

Co-ordinating EMMCs:

• IMRD – EM International MSc. in Rural Development (2004)

• EMMP – EM Master of Science in Photonics (2005)

• FUSION - European Master in Nuclear Fusion Sc. and Eng. Physics (2005)

• EMBC - EM MSc in Marine Biodiversity and Conservation (2007)

• EUMAINE – European MSc in Nematology (2007)

• IMFSE – International MSc in Fire Safety Engineering (2009)

• IMETE – International MSc in Environmental Technology and Engineering (2010)

Partner in EMMCs:

• EMLE - European Master in Law and Economics, coord. Erasmus University Rotterdam (2004)

• CEMACUBE – International MSc in Biomedical Engineering, coord. RU Groningen (2009)

Co-ordinating EMJDs:

• EMJD MARES - Joint Doctoral Programme in Marine Ecology and Conservation (2010) • EMJD FUSION-DC – Doctoral College in Fusion Science and Engineering (2011)


EMMCs at UGent: partners

Christian-Albrechts Universität, Kiel, Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, RWTH Aachen University, Universität Bielefeld, Universität Bremen, Universität Stuttgart, Universität Hamburg, Agrocampus Ouest Rennes, Université de Technologie de Compiègne, Université Henri Poincaré, Nancy 1, Université Paul Cézanne - Aix-Marseille III, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris 6, Trinity College Dublin, Universita di Bologna, Università di Pisa, Klaipédos Universitetas, Klaipeda, Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Universiteit Wageningen, University of Vienna, Warsaw School of Economics, Universidade de Evora, Universidade do Algarve, Moscow Engineering Physics Institute, St-Petersburg State Polytechnic University, Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Universidad de Jaén, Universidad de Oviedo, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Czech Technical University in Prague, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, Scottish Crop Research Institute, Invergowrie, University of Edinburgh, University of St-Andrews, Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan Stockholm, Lunds University, Lund, China Agricultural University, Beijing, Nanjing Agricultural University, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, Zheijiang University, Hangzhou, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore, University of Haifa, University of Tokyo, Escuela Superior Politecnica del Litoral – ESPOL, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, University of California, Los Angeles, University of Florida, Gainesville, University of Wisconsin, Madison, University of Pretoria, University of Sydney


Possible explanations for the success rate

• Early adoption of Bologna process from 2003 onwards

• Flemish Ministry of Education benevolent towards Erasmus Mundus

• Experience of Ghent University in EU-projects

• Support from university administration

• Presence of sufficient ‘critical mass’ in Erasmus Mundus as an added incentive for further initiatives

• Last but not least: educational standards of all partners involved

Award Criteria Part A3: “Efficiency and effectiveness”

• Academic quality and integration form the basis of every project

• In a high-level close competition, details can make the difference

• ‘Efficiency and effectiveness’ in Course management, visibility and

sustainability measures -> 20% of the max. Score

• The UGent experience <-> not THE single model


Cooperation mechanisms

Describe the organisation of the cooperation mechanisms within the consortium.

• What is the role of each of the partners in the EMMC implementation tasks (financial, evaluation, student support, promotion/marketing, etc.)?

• Describe the level of human resources that will be dedicated by each of the partners to the EMMC implementation?

• What type of governing body(/ies) will be put in place?

• How are these roles defined and endorsed in an EMMC Consortium agreement?

• To what extent are the students involved in the course coordination and implementation tasks?

• What type of management tools / methods are in place to ensure the appropriate implementation of the course (work programme, roadmap, milestones, work packages, etc.)?


Consortium’s administrative organisation

• In general EACEA addresses the project co-ordinator, but the head of the co-

ordinating institution remains responsible as legal representative (i.e. Rector / Vice-Chancellor signs all contracts)

• The project co-ordinator organises the secretariat for the consortium, presides the Management Board, guarantees the smooth operating of the consortium in general

• Preferably one full time secretariat coordinator is employed, paid by the project (‘technical coordinator’) for the day-to-day workings of the consortium, under management of the project co-ordinator

• Appoint local liaison officers (‘champions’) closely involved in the programme at all partner universities to assure embedding


Consortium management

Consortium Management Board

• contains representatives of all full partners

• meets at least twice per year

• decides by vote on academic content, selection of candidates, degree awarding, budget

• Student representative(s) included (but no vote on all aspects)

• assisted by:

• consortia can decide to create other committees or units tasked with specific aspects

• Quality Assurance Committee (alumni, professionals) • Promotion • Etc.

• local Committees at partner universities


Administrative organisation: local administrative entities

• Programme secretariat (1 FTE+) for consortium management

• Central International Relations Office for overall follow-up

• Faculty: formal approval of the programme

• Faculty Board

• Dean’s administration (student administration, quality assurance unit)

• Central unit for study programmes and student administration

• Board of Governors: formal approval of the programme

• Financial Department

• Central Student Services:

• Housing Department

• University Language Centre

• e.a.


Administrative organisation: coordinator’s secretariat

The administrative management of the programme at the coordinating secretariat encompasses:

• Promotion and communication towards prospective students • Screening of candidate-students, preparing the selection • Follow-up of students and scholars within the consortium • Visa-support to individual students (IRO: general procedures) • Communication with consortium partners • Organisation of consortium meetings • Communication with EACEA and preparation of reports • Internal cooperation within Faculty administration • Cooperation with central Student Office concerning student files and degrees • Communication with Housing Department • Cooperation with IRO concerning EACEA-modalities, contracts and issues concerning all

EMMCs • etc.

The consortium’s ‘hub’ in a rather centralised model


Management: Graphical representation


Partner Institution Partner Institution Partner Institution

Management Board

Quality Assurance

Exam and Dissertation Programme Coordinator

Programme Secretariat

…

EACEA, National Structures,

International Offices,…

Committees

External actors

Administrative organisation: International Office

• Official project communication with EACEA (for which signature of rector is needed)

• Advisory role, liaison between operational and prospective projects

• Assistance in preparation of project proposals (administration and content)

• Organisation of meetings between UGent-consortium coordinators and with local administrative entities on common issues and concerns

• If needed, additional liaison with partner universities, next to technical coordinators

• General communication with EACEA en EPOSvzw (Flemish National Agency) and other external organisations (City Council, Foreign Office,...)

• Report on specific issues related to EMA1 towards the university management

Mediation for the programmes


Administrative organisation: Central Student Admin

• Support in finalising the Consortium Agreement

• Request for the start of the Programme and the approval of the CA, to be granted by the University Management Board

• Preparation of the Diploma and Diploma Supplement model

• Enrolment of all students, also those not attending courses at UGent (EU/non-EU and regular/pro forma)

• Awarding the Diplomas and Supplements, to be signed by all partner institutions

consolidation of the programmes


Preparation of the Consortium Agreement

• Bear the future CA in mind whilst drawing up the project proposal

• Letters of Support signed by legal representatives are needed for the project proposal; adding an outline/draft of the CA is advisable too; fully endorsed CA even better

• Finalise the CA ASAP after project proposal: be aware of the long approval process within the respective partner institutions

• EACEA requires a copy of the finalised CA at the latest prior to the issuing of the first grant agreement

• Some institutions might require formally signed agreements even before handing in the project proposal


Preparation of the Consortium Agreement (2)

To be covered:

• Structure of the programme, mobility

• organizational structure and responsibilities (management)

• Financial arrangement (tuition fee, EC grant, transfers between partners)

• Admission, Application, Selection procedure and enrolment procedure

• Practical implementation (details preferably worked out in an Annex)

• Examination, transfer of credits

• Degree delivery

• Quality assurance

• Intellectual property rights


Participation Costs and Financial management

Explain how the students' participation costs to the EMMC have been calculated and agreed upon by the consortium.

• Taking into account the needs and means of each individual partner, provide a detailed description of the fees and other costs that justify the amount of participation costs that will be requested from the students for their enrollment in the masters course. If applicable, explain how the portion in excess of the EM maximum contribution to participation costs will be financed.

Describe the way the EMMC will be managed from a financial point of view.

• In complement to criterion A.3.2, provide comprehensive information on the overall estimated implementation costs of the course and partners' complementary funding (e.g. contribution from partner institutions' own resources to finance additional scholarships, contribution from non educational organisations, etc.).

• Explain how the EMMC financial resources will be managed by the consortium, and how will the Erasmus Mundus grant (more particularly the consortium lump sum and the students' contribution to the participation costs) be used and distributed among the partners.


Consortium income and partition

• Income from Flat rate (30.000 euro / year) and common tuition fees (students pay only one central amount)

• For EM-scholarship holders the tuition fee is withheld from the total grant, max. 4000 euro Cat.B, max. 8000 euro Cat.A

• Income to be used for the local tuition fees, programme management, sustainability purposes

• Division over partners can be with flat rates, and/or according to number of students, number of ECTS-credits locally delivered, etc.

To be budgeted and agreed upon at time of project proposal design; to

be consolidated in consortium agreement


Participation Costs

• Free to define, but waiver obligatory above maximum Erasmus Mundus contribution for Erasmus Mundus scholarship holders

• To be indicated in the student agreement

• Local tuition fees at each partner university

• Big differences might lead to misbalances in the consortium

• To be transferred directly between coordinating institution and partners

• Costs of other programme-related activities (workshops, field trips, language training,...) and administrative fees

• Insurance costs (minimum requirements)


Programme Management Costs

• Consortium secretariat staff • Consortium meetings • Online management tool, website • Promotion • Other overall administrative costs Create a budget table, based on enrolment prognoses of at least five

cohorts, to be included in annex to the proposal Management

– Partition between partners as established in consortium agreement – Follow-up of budget spending in accounting systems (UGent: SAP)


Development and sustainability

Describe how the consortium's development and sustainability plan is designed in order to ensure the proper implementation and continuity of the joint programme beyond Community funding and present the Consortium's proposed actions for complementary funding.

• What strategies have been envisaged, and over which period?

• What are the enrolment projections and the mid/long-term benefits for the partners?

• If applicable, how are associated members involved in this sustainability plan and what degree of commitment can they provide.

• To what extent have complementary funding possibilities been explored and/or secured?

• How do these possibilities provide additional scholarships to additional students and, if applicable, top up the difference between the fixed programme contribution to the student's participation costs and the actual cost for the consortium?


Development and sustainability (2)

• Setting up a new course programme: semi-permanent nature

• European funding is to be considered seed money

Thinking about sustainability is a logic consequence

• Mostly, but not only a financial matter:

• Programme accreditation / Degree recognition

• Staff in consortium network: leaves, pensions, etc.

• embedding in local academic and administrative structures

• Impact from many facets (promotion, quality, organisation,...) all aiming for:

• participation increase

• cost reduction


Development and sustainability (3)

• Make provision for a reserve fund through budget surplus

• A budget surplus might also allow for partial fee waivers to ‘self-sponsoring students’

• Investigate possibilities for other external scholarship schemes

• Input from partner organisations for complementary funding

• Extra scholarships (very specific to subject area)

• Extra funding for management

• Cost-effective organisation (share administrative tasks?)

• Future in ‘Erasmus for All’?


Promotion measures

Describe the course promotion measures taken by the consortium to increase the course's (and the EM programme's) visibility and attractiveness.

• What type of promotion / visibility mechanisms will be implemented (e.g. via professional/academic associations, media, newsletters, conferences, fairs, etc.). How will the EMMC's dedicated website be promoted?


• Flyers, posters, promotional websites, recruitment fairs

• Share responsibility among all partners

• Action by Associated Members; use the network

• Creation of new original approaches?

• Don’t forget the EU students

Some general observations

• A strong sense of initiative from the part of the promoter/coordinator is needed, but input and commitment of all partners is crucial

• Partnerships can originate from longstanding academic collaboration and mutual trust, but formalisation and control mechanisms are necessary

• International collaboration requires internal collaboration: the academics take the initiative, but the administration should be involved/consulted from an early stage
