Navigation auf uzh.ch
Navigation auf uzh.ch
Christian Leder (UZH)
Abstract:
How can, and actually do, Fachhochschulen and Pädagogische Hochschulen ensure a scientific qualification for a certain part of their personnel at the doctoral‘s level? As their fields of study and research are not fully congruent with traditional disciplines at doctoral-granting universities (UH and ETH), the FH and PH have, early on, claimed their own right to award doctorates (KFH 2011). However, this has contradicted with guiding principles in current Swiss higher education policy. Policy makers, namely the SERI/SBFI, therefore have put forward the idea of cooperative doctorates. After a first round (2017-2020), a second 4-year period of special funding has recently been set up (2021-2024); this is administrated by swissuniversities as part of the P-1 program (link).
Drawing on an ongoing CHESS-project, my presentation will focus on the unresolved issues, (inter-)institutional tensions and open questions regarding further developments in the 5 or 10 years to come. What are the contexts and plausible routes of further development after the second – and presumably last – period of special funding for cooperative doctorates has come to its end? I put these reflections in context by showing the development of cooperative doctoral programs in Switzerland so far, reflect on their place in the field of doctoral education and present some findings from our empirical research, which includes conversations with key actors such as rectors and policy-makers, both in the Zurich area and at the national level.
The presentation involves a small “working part” that aims to collect the participant’s take on the issue and to facilitate a better understanding of the problems and questions regarding scientific qualification and research development at non-doctoral-granting universities in Switzerland. As normal, there should be some time for an open discussion as well.
Katharina Sommer & Christian Wassmer (ZHAW)
Abstract:
In the Federal Act on Funding and Coordination of the Swiss Higher Education Sector (HEdA, Art. 26, Para. 1), the focus of teaching and research at universities of applied sciences is clearly set on "a blend of practical studies and applied research and development", with the aim of preparing students directly for a professional career. The close interaction of science-based and practice-oriented teaching and research is thus essential for the exclusive education of graduates of universities of applied sciences. A "socialization" of students in this double sense is not only achieved by the currently strongly supported dual competence profile of lecturers at universities of applied sciences (swissuniversities, P11), but also by various forms of integration of practice and practice-relevant research into teaching.
In our presentation, we will address the question of what exactly "practice orientation" in teaching and research means - or, in other words, in what diverse ways the triad of practice-teaching-research can be implemented at universities of applied sciences. The aim will therefore be to differentiate the concept of practice orientation at universities of applied sciences. In doing so, we ask whether certain forms of practice orientation are implemented more strongly than others depending on the subject area and what implications this weighting may have for the education of students. To validate and expand our systematization, a total of eight focus groups with ZHAW students (one per department) will be conducted. First results of the focus group analysis will be presented during the presentation.
Lukas Scherer (OST)
Abstract:
The Federal Act on Funding and Coordination of the Swiss Higher Education Sector (Higher Education Act, HEdA) requires that universities have their own quality assurance systems and that quality assurance is carried out effectively in accordance with national criteria and international standards. The HEI must file a self-evaluation proposal and undergo an external evaluation by peers under the surveillance of an agency. The study highlights the outcomes of the institutional accreditation process in respect of the organisational maturity. The study outlines differences by HEI type and delivers contextual and procedural recommendations to political players and HEI to improve Quality Assurance.
The study collated data of the self-evaluation proposal and the external evaluation reports and concludes with a comparison of all accredited HEI by end of 2020. Aside the qualitative content analysis interviews with responsible experts involved and engaged in institutional accreditation process offer insights in the core procedures.
According to Frederic Laloux’s concepts and practices of a new generation of organisations (“Reinventing Organizations”, 2014) the study’s findings ascribe a « modern expression and operation type » to most of the HEI. However, differentiations occur by pedagogical HEI and universities of advanced studies and by field of actions.
