Search

This paper researches excellence in higher education by looking into honours programmes (HPs) in Dutch higher education. HPs are selective and aimed at the brightest students, offering them a more challenging – often extra-curricular – study experience. Based on a survey (n=259) at Dutch universities, our study identifies three types of honours students: task-committed, above-average ability, and creative. We asked each group how their ideal HP looks like. Task-committed students are interested in disciplinary HPs that have a student-centred approach. The above-average ability students demand a highly selective and small-scale HP that admits only the brightest students. Moreover, they prefer a HP that is isolated from regular study programmes. Creative students are interested in a variety of disciplinary subjects, not offered in regular curricula, often requiring substantial amounts of extra time and effort. The differences in preferred configurations of HPs have policy implications for universities interested in introducing excellence education

In this working paper we reflect upon performance agreements in higher education (HE): during the last decade, performance-based steering tools were introduced or reformed in almost every higher education system. They are regarded as a promising instrument to contribute to the achievement of high quality higher education, but in countries that have a longer history with performance agreements (such as many U.S. and German states, Austria, Finland and Denmark) sometimes significant changes have taken place between generations, and we want to understand why this is. With this working paper we highlight a number of key issues to be taken into account when the introduction or evaluation of performance agreements is being considered. We have gathered information (from laws, white papers, websites of governments and institutions, and expert interviews) on a range of higher education systems alongside a general literature review. We argue policy makers should not to copy ‘blindly’ the design and implementation of performance agreements from other countries, as their culture, political and legal system, policy style, size, HE system characteristics and strategic agendas are different. Nonetheless, experiences from elsewhere are an important source for inspiration and a valuable input

Improving completion and reducing dropout in higher education are key concerns for higher education in Europe. This study on dropout and completion in higher education in Europe demonstrates that national governments and higher education institutions use three different study success objectives: completion, time-to-degree and retention. To address these objectives policy makers at national and institutional level apply various policy instruments. These can be categorized under three main policy headings: financial incentives; information and support for students; and organizational issues. The evidence indicates that countries that have more explicit study success objectives, targets and policies are likely to be more successful. Particularly if the policy approach is comprehensive and consistent. As such, it is important that study success is an issue in the information provision to (prospective) students, in financial incentives for students and institutions, in quality assurance, and in the education pathways offered to students. Furthermore, increasing the responsibility of higher education institutions for study success, for example in the area of selecting, matching, tracking, counselling, mentoring and integrating students in academic life is clearly effective. Finally, to support the policy debate and monitoring of study success evidence, there is a need for more systematic international comparative data and thorough analysis of the effectiveness of study success policies

U-Map and U-Multirank are web-based transparency instruments, showing institutional diversity in higher education. Both tools are multidimensional, web-based and user-driven, and make use of indicators relating to individual higher education institutions (HEIs). U-Map shows what a HEI is doing and how that compares to other institutions worldwide. U-Multirank visualises how well HEIs are performing relative to others. The advantages of both instruments over other classifications and rankings include the multi-dimensional approach and their user-driven character. We will discuss the distinctive features of both instruments, the choice of indicators employed and address some of the criticism.

De basisbeurs als onderdeel van de studiefinanciering dreigt te verdwijnen. Studenten zullen meer moeten lenen. Het aanstaande kabinet voorziet een sociaal leenstelsel. Studenten en bestuurders in het hoger onderwijs staan op hun achterste benen. Hoe asociaal is het leenstelsel eigenlijk?

In its recent (2011) communication “Supporting Growth and Jobs—an agenda for the Modernisation of Europe’s Higher Education Systems,” the European Commission has once again urged Europe’s universities to reform their human-resources policies—to increase the autonomy of the universities in this respect and to introduce incentives to re- ward excellence in teaching and research. Europe’s universities will need to recruit academics by flexible, open, and transparent procedures and to provide them with attractive career prospects. Without a committed and adequately compensated professoriate, universities will find it hard to recruit the best and brightest academic talent to work for them and to provide the teaching and research that Europe needs, in order to be a competitive knowledge-driven region.