Strengthening of Internationalization in B&H Higher Education

Strengthening of Internationalization in B&H Higher Education External Quality Control and Monitoring Report (First year of project)

by MSc. Mónica Vieira – Instituto Politécnico do Porto

Porto, December 2016 STINT

Content overview

of 18 @MV/P.PORTO – December 2016 STINT

1 Introduction

1.1. Title of the Project ERASMUS+ KA2 - Capacity Building in Higher Education “Strengthening of Internationalization in B&H Higher Education” - 561874-EPP-1-2015-1-BE-EPPKA2-CBHE-SP

1.2. Aims of External Quality Control and Monitoring Report 1. The present Report is an activity within the work package six (WP6) and was deemed to be in full compliance with the final submission of the project. 2. The main tasks of the WP6 will apply to regular reporting at the end of each year by all B&H project partners. As all project partners should act responsibility and consciously in accordance with the ordinary and extraordinary controls, such as the mechanism of internal and external reporting established at the beginning of the project during the first meeting, internal reporting is support for external control and monitoring. Responsibility in this WP is shared by all the project partners who need to ensure efficient and planned implementation of all project activities. 3. Furthermore at the beginning of the project, a quality policy paper was established with the aim of achievement a common understanding amongst all project partners with regard to the quality of the deliverables produced, the methods applied to monitoring the quality and the ethical attitudes guiding partner’s involvement.

2 Project Overview

2.1 Aims and outcomes of the project 1. The STINT is a 3 years project that officially started in 15-10-2015 and it will end in 14-10-2018. The project focuses on the problems resulting from the non-total alignment of the national procedures and legislation in B&H related to the recognition of foreign qualifications as promoted in the Lisbon Recognition Convention. Recognition mechanisms represents the cornerstone of the internationalization of Higher Education (HE) and mobility. 2. Main goal of this project is strengthening and improving of the internationalization process of B&H universities. 3. The project activities are focused on institutional and national strengthening of internationalization and recognition mechanisms in B&H. Projects outputs are oriented on the detailed analysis of the "state of art" in B&H and in the strengthening of HEIs through: i) the development and implementation of strategies and indicators for internationalization, ii) the improvement of the national recognition model, iii) the improvement of HEIs capacities (human and physical), iv) the development of criteria for assessing internationalization and their incorporation in the existing criteria for accreditation of HEIs.

2.2 Work packages for the project 1st year

WP1 - Evaluation of current internationalization and recognition mechanisms – Leader: Higher Education Accreditation Agency of Republika Srpska (RS HEAA) The wider objective of this WP is the assessment of the current state and identification areas for changes, as well as the improvement of internationalization and recognition mechanisms through: a) the identification of the present position at all partner institutions, meaning that this WP is an input for all other WPs. b) the analysis of the state of internationalization and the state of the mechanisms resembling the qualifications on the national level through participation of all significant/relevant stakeholders (all public universities, the Accreditation Agency, the Ministries, and Centre for Information and Recognition of Qualification in Higher Education). c) the exchange of experience and by presentation of the qualitative and quantitative indicators, d) a developed form for self-assessment, a detailed analysis will be prepared based upon the basic parameters of internationalization and EHEA’s recognition model. e) a developed SWOT analysis from the EU experts from partner institutions, for B&H public universities, ministries, Agency for accreditation and Centre for Information and Recognition of Qualification in Higher Education Afterwards. This WP will allow the identification of different fields to undergo reforms and improvement.

WP2 - Development internationalization strategy and recognition model – Leader: Centre for Information and Recognition of Qualification in Higher Education (CIP) This WP aims: a) to develop a B&H recognition model for Higher Education institutions for practising fair recognition according to the principles of the Lisbon Recognition Convention, its subsidiary documents, latest EAR HEI Manual and the UNESCO Recommendation on the Recognition of Studies and Qualifications in Higher Education. b) to develop a strategy for internationalization of all partner universities taking into consideration the national situation, diversity and priorities of all partner universities. A series of internationalization measures/indicators related to the partner universities’ strategy will be developed in accordance with Mobility Strategy 2020 for the EHEA. After completion of all key documents the comparative analysis will be conducted. This WP is one of the most important WPs. WP3 - Capacity building – Leader: University of Zenica (UNZE) WP4 - Pilot activities of internationalization – Leader: Buckinghamshire New University (Bucks) WP5 - Criteria for assessing of internationalization of B&H universities – Leader: Agency for Development of Higher Education and Quality Assurance B&H (HEA) WP6 - Quality plan and monitoring – Leader: Instituto Politécnico do Porto (P.Porto) This work package should provide the regular reporting and control of all project activities, as well as compliance with certain ethical principles, and also to clarify the roles in the project. This aims will be achieved: a) with the establishment of a Quality Policy Statement at the beginning of the project Which will allow a common understanding amongst all project partners with regard to the quality of

the deliverables produced, the methods applied to quality monitoring and the ethical attitudes guiding partner’s involvement. b) with the regular presentation by all B&H project partners of reports at the end of each year, where all partners will act with responsibility and consciously in accordance with the ordinary and extraordinary monitoring. c) with the presentation of 3 external reports at the end of each year of the project lifetime. d) with the quality monitoring executed at the end of all meetings and activities. WP7 - Dissemination and exploitation – Leader: University of East Sarajevo (UES) The main objective of this WP is to ensure the dissemination and sustainability of project results. Regarding so: a) dissemination of the project results will be based on the principles of full transparency and involvement of all relevant stakeholders during the project lifetime and sharing of appropriate information and visibility activities. b) sustainability will be achieved through the inclusion of all relevant project partners who can ensure sustainability, such as government bodies: ministries, agencies, and the Centre for Information and Recognition of Qualifications B&H. WP8 - Management of project activities – Leader: KU Leuven This WP is the main WP aiming efficient management of project activities including the establishment of project structure, respect for fundamental ethical requirements, establishing financial structure and control of the implemented activities with financial audit. This aim will be achieved through: a) the implementation of a detailed Project Coordination Plan, proper planning, organization, coordination and control of all activities to ensure the implementation of the Erasmus + grant as planned by the project application. b) establishment of a Management structure (consortium, executive board, procedures, tools) in order to ensure financial and contractual management consortium. c) the Communication Management Plan will be defined, as well as communication requirements for the project, and how information should be distributed; d) the definition of a Risk Management Plan and a Conflict Resolution Strategy.

2.3 Work plan for the project 1st year

Activities Total M2 M5 M7 duration Ref.nr/ M8 M9 M10 M11 M12 Sub-ref Title (number of nr weeks) Analysis of current situation about internationalisation and recognition 1.1. mechanisms 1.2. Creation questionnaire for self-assessment of all B&H partners 1.3. Implementation of self-assessment in B&H x SWOT analysis for all partners about internationalisation and 1.4. ox recognition mechanisms Workshop for developing recognition model, internationalisation 2.1. x strategy and indicators 2.2. Development of B&H recognition model ox ox ox 2.3. Development of internationalisation strategy at all partner universities x x 6.1. Internal quality control and monitoring x 6.2. External quality control and monitoring x 6.3. Evaluation form for QC of all meetings and activities o x ox x ox ox ox x x Development of dissemination and sustainability plan during project 7.1. ox ox lifetime Public dissemination through design and maintenance of the project 7.2. x x x x x x x x x website 7.3. Dissemination through design and maintenance newsletter x x x 7.4. Dissemination through design and distribution of promotional materials x Dissemination through media activities and publication in local 7.5. x x x newspapers 8.1. Kick off meeting o 8.2. Consortium meetings o 8.3. Financial and administrative management of all project activity ox ox ox ox ox ox ox ox ox

3 Monitoring

3.1 Outcomes, conclusions and recommendations

Outcomes WP1 Activity 1.1 - Analysis of current situation about internationalization and recognition mechanisms Execution: 7-10.03/2016 - Banja Luka, B&H Expected Outcome: Event, Report Realised outcomes: During the meeting in Banja Luka all the 16 partners had presented the “state of art” of internationalization and qualifications recognition mechanisms in a clear way. The openness and the transparency of all the presentations and partners permitted a very good exchange of experiences and deepening awareness of the challenges underlying at the project. To see the outcomes click here. Conclusions and recommendations: Despite the delay in the starting of the project the activity was completed with success and as it was a prerequisite for the next activities it was an important moment for the development of WP1 and the future of the project. It was grateful to see the involvement and commitment of all the partners, the B&H and EU partners.

Activity 1.2 - Creation of a questionnaire for self-assessment of all B&H partners Execution: 1 February – 12 May 2016 Expected Outcome: Report, Service/Product Realised outcomes: To help in the evaluation of current internationalization and qualifications recognition mechanisms as previewed, not one questionnaire was developed but three questionnaires in order to response better to the aim of the WP and to have a deep overview of the “state of art“:  1 for students related with internationalization (with 5 pages);  1 for management of the Universities and faculties related with internationalization (with 12 pages);  1 for secretaries related with qualifications recognition mechanisms (with 13 pages). Despite not being originally projected, it was also developed a Manual for surveying students (with 2 pages).

This activity was a prerequisite for the implementation of activity 1.3 and it was previewed to be realized in 10 working days but it take approximately 3 months. Conclusions and recommendations: The complexity of developing 3 questionnaires with the participation of all the partners, it took much longer time than initially expected. This has led to a substantial delay in the implementation of activity 1.3 although without put in question the success of both activities. RS HEAA coordination and involvement was crucial to the success of the activity. It was good to have at disposal the 3 templates of the questionnaire as well the Manual for surveying students.

Activity 1.3 - Implementation of self-assessment in B&H Execution: 12 May – 31 October 2016 Expected Outcome: Report Realised outcomes: From May until the end of October electronic questionnaires were open to a total of around 37.000 students, to 250 members of university’s and faculties’ management and to 91 secretaries at the 8 partners’ universities. From these total universe of people invited to fill the questionnaire it was obtained a global response rate around 7,4% from students, around 80,5% from representatives of the management of universities and faculties and 82,5% from secretaries. Conclusions and recommendations: Although it is not possible to analyse the overall results for lack of a document with general data generated by application of the questionnaires, we can roughly say that the response rate from the students was very low (and in some universities it doesn’t have any statistical significance) which may shows none sensitivity from students with such issue. In contrast the response rate from de management of universities and faculties it’s very good which may show that managers are sensitive to the importance of internationalization. Also the involvement and interest of secretaries for recognition mechanisms is very high. It was important the producing of a document related with the main outputs of such inquiry. A global perspective and a perspective by HEI. Such document it will be important for the SWOT analysis that will be produced by the EU partners.

Activity 1.4 - SWOT analysis for all partners about internationalization and recognition mechanisms Execution: 1 September – 15 November 2016

Expected Outcome: Report Realised outcomes: Based on the results of the self-assessment realized in activity 1.3 each B&H university (8 in total) has produced three SWOT analysis, two for internationalization (based on the answers of the students and management) and one more related to the mechanisms of recognition of qualifications. Also the representatives from Centre for Information and Recognition of Qualifications in HE (CIP), Agency for Development of HE and QA B&H (HEA), HE Accreditation Agency of Republika Srpska (RSHEAA) and Federal Ministry of Education and Science (FMON) produce a SWOT analysis related with internationalization and qualifications recognition mechanisms. To see the SWOT analysis click here Conclusions and recommendations: As basis for the construction of the internationalization strategy of B&H HEI, the seriousness with which this analysis was made, shows the great interest and involvement of the B&H partners. However, it important to gather the main results of the self-assessment as well the Manual for self-assessment.

Outcomes WP2 Activity 2.1 - Workshop for developing recognition model, internationalization strategy and indicators Execution: 05-08.09/2016 - Bihac, B&H Expected Outcome: Event, Report Realised outcomes: Sharing of practices, experiences and knowledge between EU partners and B&H partners. At this workshop EU partners as well UES as sub-coordinator had an important role in the training of the people that will be involved in the preparation of the strategy and key performance indicators for internationalization. Sharing the perspective of the agencies, of CIP and FMON regarding the construction of SWOT analysis for internationalization and recognition mechanisms was also an important outcome of this workshop. This workshop was the input for the realization of the activities from WP2. To see the outcomes click here. Conclusions and recommendations:

The experiences of the UE partners and the transfer of such experience and practices to B&H partners and the perspective of the agencies, CIP and FMON along with the outputs of WP1 set up a good baseline for the design of the strategy. However it should be mentioned that the satisfaction with the usefulness of the information spread at this particular activity it was one of the lower “high satisfaction”.

Activity 2.2 - Development of recognition model Execution: September - November 2016 Expected Outcome: Report, Service/Product Realised outcomes: Presentation of a first draft of the B&H recognition model for B&H Higher Education institutions in order to proceed to the harmonization of procedures for recognition of foreign higher education qualifications at HEI in B&H. A Glossary for Recognition of Qualifications (10 pages) was also developed with the participation of every B&H partners. To see the outcomes click here and here. Conclusions: Under the leadership of CIP it was presented a first draft of the B&H recognition model, that it was discussed by the partners as a version to be presented to every management bodies, namely the Senates, of the B&H partner universities in order to discuss, give suggestions and comments. Some discussion around the role of CIP in this process emerged. A well balanced common understanding around the model proposal and the role of CIP should be achieved in order to allow to reach one of the main goals of the project. The creation of a Glossary for Recognition of Qualifications that it was not previewed at the beginning is a commendable initiative.

Activity 2.3 - Development of internationalization strategy at all partner universities Execution: November 2016 - February 2017 Expected Outcome: Report, Service/Product Realised outcomes: The 8 public universities started inside of each one the discussion and the development or upgrade of the internationalization strategies. In order to the harmonization of vocabulary related with internationalization a Glossary of terms and expressions used within internationalization in HE (5 pages) was developed.

To see the outcomes click here. Conclusions and recommendations: Universities when defining or redefining the internationalization strategy must bear in mind the need to define or redefine the strategic objectives and key areas, the key performance indicators (activity 2.4) and the mechanisms for its implementation and monitoring, always with the final aim of enhancement internationalization in the broad comprehension of it. The creation of a Glossary for Internationalization that it was not previewed at the beginning is a commendable initiative.

Outcomes WP6 Activity 6.1 - Internal quality control and monitoring Execution: November 2016 Expected Outcome: Report Realised outcomes: A form was developed by UES with the contribution of EU partners, containing the name and description of the activity or task, responsibility for the execution of activities, indicators of progress and outcomes. From 16 partners, 13 reports with the progress of the activities were submitted and presented (missing KU Leuven, Bucks and Ministry of Education and Culture Republic of Srpska (MPKRS) internal reports). To see the outcomes click here. Conclusions and recommendations: This report presented by 13 partners and the monitoring realized along the year allowed to verify the commitment of each single partner. Despite the visibility of this commitment is however necessary that each of the 16 participants complete this internal report for an in-depth follow-up. The lower level of participation and contribution of the MPKRS must be analysed.

Activity 6.2 - External quality control and monitoring Execution: December 2016 Expected Outcome: Report Realised outcomes:

It was previewed to build an External Report taking into account the Internal Reports a monitoring visit to each B&H partner. Considering that monitoring was done along the year that every sort of outcomes is verifiable in the project website and 13 of 16 partners presented the internal report it was decided not to do the monitoring visit. Conclusions and recommendations: As mentioned before it is necessary that all participants complete this internal report in order to make a deep monitoring.

Activity 6.3 - Evaluation form for QC of all meetings and activities Execution: After each meeting Expected Outcome: Report, Service/Product Realised outcomes: At the very beginning of the project UES developed and established an electronic and printed evaluation form for quality monitoring of all the events that take place in the framework of the project as well as other activities. After each event and activities was conducted the evaluation (electronic) to assess the satisfaction of project partners and provided quality monitoring of the performed activities. So, 5 evaluations were conducted and 5 reports were published. The responses for evaluation are 16 responses for kick off – 8 comments; 16 responses for 1.1 – 8 comments; 18 for EACEA – 7 comments 16 for 2.1; 11 responses for 8.2 – 4 comments. In addition to these monitoring was still held an external monitoring visit by the EACEA realized in June in Sarajevo where all B&H partners were present as well as the coordinator. To see the outcomes click in the “Evaluation” of each event. Conclusions and recommendations: The overall satisfaction with the performed events is generally very high. Nevertheless it is possible to improve some items in the structure of the meetings, namely the time for networking and in the way how events helps to improve the professional effectiveness. These are the two evaluated items related to the events with a lower satisfaction and that do not have verified great evolution. Considering that the time to network, to share ideas and practices, to discuss is an important element in the construction of projects and in reaching the expected outcomes, maybe more attention should be given to this item. Also the issue related to the way the events help partners improve the professional effectiveness should not be neglected since the project is a capacity building project and that is intended to enable partners to implement and develop their internationalization in the several dimensions of their missions.

Finally, it should be pointed out that not all partners respond to these inquiries. As a tool for monitoring and improvement of the project becomes important that all assess the events.

Outcomes WP7 Activity 7.1 - Development of dissemination and sustainability plan during project lifetime Execution: January 2016 and November 2016 Expected Outcome: Report Realised outcomes: At the beginning of the project a detailed Dissemination and a Sustainability Plans were presented by UES and their updating was done throughout the year. Nearly every partners participated in the construction of such Plans. All contributed for the updating of the documents. All the universities, agencies and CIP published information about STINT on their websites at least once. UNZE team created a Facebook page of project (https://www.facebook.com/STINTBIH) with 102 followers in the beginning of December 2016. All the materials produced during the Events are published in the STINT website. It was also made 4 press releases. To see the outcomes click here and here. Conclusions and recommendations: Dissemination of the project and project outcomes is very important for the sustainability of the project. Taking into account the strategy proposed in the Dissemination Plan, we may say that such Dissemination was done well throughout the year. The recommendation of the EACEA done in the report about the monitoring visit promoted by this Agency should be kept in mind: “ Disseminate the results towards other relevant institutions/organizations in BiH in order enhance the impact and sustainability of the project.”

Activity 7.2 - Public dissemination through design and maintenance of the project website Execution: During all months Expected Outcome: Report, Service/Product Realised outcomes:

UES as WP leader provided the development, production, maintenance and update of the project website from the very beginning of the project. All the partners have possibility to give its own contribution for improving the web page. All the information related with the project is available on the project website: www.stint-project.net/ Conclusions: This activity is being well managed. The website contains all the information about the project, is well structured, and it easy to find the information. Continue with implementation the activity.

Activity 7.3 - Dissemination through design and maintenance newsletter Execution: May, July, October, November 2016 Expected Outcome: Report, Service/Product Realised outcomes: 4 newsletters were published in the website by the UES in cooperation with project partners. To see the outcomes click here. Conclusions: It was previewed in the activity the production of a new issue every 3 months. Although that it wasn’t happen the four newsletters respond in a general way to the main goal of such publication that it is maintain project partners constantly informed about the latest news and current events.

Activity 7.4 - Dissemination through design and distribution of promotional materials Execution: Started in December 2016 Expected Outcome: Report, Service/Product Realised outcomes: KU Leuven presented a proposal of a short brochure related with “Internationalization within universities in Europe”. Conclusion and recommendations: A delayed delivery of this activity is undeniable. Although we are convinced that it could be overcome considering all the involvement of partners and all the work done until know. Nevertheless, we would like to underline the need of hurry up the signature of the new annex for subcontracting, having in mind what was agreed

of 18 @MV/P.PORTO – December 2016 STINT during the consortium meeting in December: “For this, the project coordinator will send new annex for subcontracting to all partners for signature and stamping. This activity should be done very quickly because of the process procurement dissemination material has to start as early as possible.” (Report, p.6)

Activity 7.5 - Dissemination through media activities and publication in local newspapers Execution: March, October 2016 Expected Outcome: Report Realised outcomes:

Regarding the dissemination through media and publication in local newspapers were done 2 publications in press (Glas Srpske, Euroblic) and 2 presentations in TV (Una-Sana TV). Conclusions and recommendations: The dissemination through media and publication in local newspapers is being done but B&H could be more active regarding this kind of dissemination. Despite in the presented internal reports be noted these publications and presentations, it hasn’t been possible to find evidence of the same for instance in the website.

Outcomes WP8 Activity 8.1 - Kick off meeting Execution: 24-27.01/2016 - Gent, BE Expected Outcome: Event, Report Realised outcomes: At the Kick off meeting a management structure and rules of conduct were approved by all partners. It was also presented and approved important documents for the project like Dissemination and Sustainability Plans, Risk Management Plan, Communication Management Plan, Conflict Resolution Strategy, Evaluation form and a Quality Policy Statement. It was also presented the project in detail and the role of each partner within the project. Conclusions and recommendations:

As mentioned before the project started with a delay of 3-4 months. In consequence the activity occurred with the mentioned delay. In spite of the delay, in this meeting many important documents for the future of the project were discussed and approved which once again shows the involvement and the interests of partners in reach the proposed main goals of the project. The management structure seems to work. To see the outcomes click here and here.

Activity 8.2 - Consortium meetings Execution: 30.11 – 3/4.12.2016 - High Wycombe, UK Expected Outcome: Event, Report Realised outcomes: The first consortium meeting took place in High Wycombe having as host partner the New Buckinghamshire University. Important decisions for the whole project success were taken especially decisions related with the 2nd year of the project, some of them related with management of project, financial issues, procedures related with the procurement for equipment and books and others related with some activities that should happen soon (e.g. sending recognition model to all universities on revision, giving suggestions on our languages and English language; EU partners have to do SWOT analysis of Internationalization for B&H and SWOT analysis of Recognition Qualifications for B&H. The term is next meeting in Mostar (probably June 2017) and also Comparative analysis among all B&H universities; …) To see the outcomes click here. Conclusions and recommendations: As the other events, this was one more that went in a very good atmosphere and involvement of partners. Although not all partners have attended the meeting, the partners of UNBI sent their inputs to the meeting showing their interest and commitment with the project. Such once again didn't happen with MPKRS. We would like to emphasize the need for the consortium remain aware of the deadlines and the upcoming activities, in similarity with the attention given in the last year.

Activity 8.3 - Financial and administrative management of all project activities Execution: along all the year Expected Outcome: Report

Realised outcomes: Coordinator and sub coordinator work together to clarify and implement the financial and administrative aspects like P reparation of activities, minutes of meetings, project documentation workflow, financial management, etc. During all months all partners worked on different administrative and financial issues of the project and sent to the coordinator all documents need. To see the outcomes click here. Conclusions and recommendations: The overall management of the project seems to be executed in the smooth way. The late signature of the partnership agreements due the need of additional clarification of rules about reimbursement of funds bring to partners some problems that are already overtaken. However, issues as financial resources for staff costs, equipment and subcontracting should not be forgotten.

4 Final Observations

1. Due to the delay with the signature of the Grant Agreement between the project coordinator and the EACEA the project started with a time delay of 3-4 months. The kick off meeting only happened at the end of January 2016. 2. The late signature of the partnership agreements due the need of additional clarification of rules about reimbursement of funds also bring some “noise” to the execution of the project. Despite this delay, the efforts made by the project coordinator to solve everything with the least possible damage to the project and to the partners should be praised. 3. As consequence of this initial delay in the start of the project some problems in fulfilling all the planned tasks for the first year of the project showed up. However, from the internal monitoring reports produced by 13 partners at the end of the 1st year and from the monitoring carried out at each meeting it is possible to verify the great effort made by everyone in order to recover the time lost at the beginning. Given this we also should praised the effort made by all partners, namely the B&H partners, to minor the consequences of such delay. 4. It was gratifying to see the involvement, interest and commitment of all partners (despite a lower participation and contribution to the project of the representatives of the Ministry of Education and Culture of Republika Srpska), throughout the year. Such atmosphere is central to the sustainability of project results.

5. As one of the main goals of the project is the creation and adoption of the Qualifications Recognition model, the consensus around the existent proposal and the role of CIP, is a major key point that must not be disregarded. All the work that as still to be done is something we must not go and lose and that request a well-balanced common understanding around the model proposal. 6. It is also important to highlight the development along the first year of some documents that helped the realization of the activities and that will last over time, such for example the glossary of terms and expressions used within the recognition of qualifications in higher education, the glossary for internationalization and the Manual developed for the implementation of the self-assessment surveys from WP1. 7. It shouldn’t be neglected all the work that still need to be done, regarding the development/upgrade and implementation of the Strategy for Internationalization as the need to define or redefine the strategic objectives and key areas, the key performance indicators and the mechanisms for its implementation and monitoring. 8. Regarding the dissemination activities it was good to have in the STINT website the presentations on TV and publications in local newspapers. Project dissemination efforts should continue to be carried out, especially within the higher education in general and government authorities in the country. 9. It should be paid attention to the financial issues, in order such subject does not consume so many time to partners, namely coordinator an sub-coordinator, allowing be focused in what is really important in the project.

of 18 @MV/P.PORTO – December 2016