national and institutional strategies in a changing landscape: a norwegian reform proposal sverre...

National and institutional strategies in a changing landscape:

A Norwegian reform proposal

Sverre RustadVilnius, 17 April 2008

2 Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research

Norwegian higher education – an overview

• 38 state-owned HEIs– 7 universities– 5 specialized university institutions

(architecture, business administration, music, sports, veterinary medicine)

– 24 university colleges– 2 academies of the arts

• Military and police academies• Private HEIs

– approximately 10 % of students– 6 fully accredited institutions– a further 25 with accredited programmes


Norwegian higher education II

• Decentralized institutional structure– successful in terms of access– poses challenges in terms of quality

• Governance– 1990s: micro-management by Ministry

• e.g. organizational structure, programme portfolio, number of students, admissions, professorships, budgeting

– 2002-2003: major delegation of authority through Quality Reform

– diversity a central objective in both cases


Institutional strategies

• 1990s– Universities: continue as before– Creation of Norwegian University of Science

and Technology (government-induced)– Colleges (from 1994): consolidate, grow,

raise academic level

• Post 2000– Universities: continue as before– Increased emphasis on competition,

especially excellence in research– Colleges: become universities or more

university-like


Challenges to diversity (Norway)

• All HEIs governed by same legislation

• All HEIs required by law to carry out research and development work – no formal division of responsibilities between types of institutions

• One common set of indicators for output-based financing

• Structure of academic positions and salaries regulated nationally – same for all institutions– academic drift at personal level


Challenges to diversity (II)

• Possible for HEIs to be accredited in higher category – main criteria related to number of master and doctoral programmes– academic drift at institutional level

• Strong regional element in all policy areas– activity/employment considerations– competition for resources– regions want universities


Status

• Attempts at centrally regulated division of labour have not worked

• Deregulation within present framework of governance seems to reduce rather than stimulate diversity

• Move from (partially) binary structure to hierarchy of similar institutions

• No top institutions in international rankings


Pressures for reform

• Increased competition for students, staff and research funds, also internationally– quality is at the centre of success– competitiveness in research requires

concentration

• Higher education and research seen as key to competitiveness and social, economic and cultural development– further increasing the pressure for quality

• International reform processes (Bologna, EU)


Pressures for reform (II)

• Demographic changes– reduced youth cohorts in most parts of the

country from 2015– accentuated by social preferences– some institutions already face major

recruitment problems

• As more and more HEIs become universities, remaining university colleges, especially small regional ones, will struggle


What to do?

• Government commission (January 2008) proposes (i.a.):– process of mergers of HEIs, based on

proposals from institutions• resulting institutions will be universities

– stronger element of national steering/policy supported by strategic funding

– development of distinctive institutional profiles through long-term agreements, supervised by international advisory group

– concentration of research training– changes in institutional management


Institutional management

• Considerations:– competent management – strategic ability– democracy/representativity– execution of autonomy within national limits

• Present model:– majority of board members elected among staff

and students– board chaired by elected rector– administration headed by director with law-

embedded powers– institutions may choose alternative model

• Proposal:– board chaired by external member appoints

rector with full executive powers


Summary

• Institutional strategies determined by possibilities, internal and external pressures– not always in line with national goals and

priorities

• How to balance national policies and institutional autonomy?– incentives vs. more direct steering

• Proposal combines mergers with steering– new management challenges

• Proposals now undergoing consultation

national and institutional strategies in a changing landscape: a norwegian reform proposal sverre...

Documents