Jump to content

Quality Agreements

Introduction

This section accounts for the Quality Agreements funds spent in the context of 'Investing in Educational Quality, Quality Agreements 2019-2024' (April 2018). The report was prepared using the mandatory frameworks.[1] For this reason, this report not only provides insight into the spending in 2021, but also into spending during the second half of 2019 and the calendar years 2020 and 2021. The report sets out progress and preliminary outcomes and contingencies in 2020 and 2021 (effects of COVID-19). The report describes interim adjustments, including how any changes were discussed with the participatory body. Erasmus University (EUR) invested additional internal funds in the years 2019 to 2021, with the aim of strengthening improvement and innovation initiatives at faculties. The report also addresses the financial accounting of these internal funds. First, below is a summary of the effects of the Quality Agreements funds.

In the period 2019-2021, the Quality Agreements funds made a major contribution to the improvement of educational quality in many EUR educational programmes and the way lecturers were professionalised and supported to continuously improve their teaching. Lecturer teams have been reinforced with educationalists (learning innovators; they help to better design the teaching). Small scale has been promoted through the use of additional lecturers, student assistants, tutors and mentors. Due to the efforts of, in particular, the learning innovators and student assistants, the quality of education was maintained even during the COVID-19 pandemic. A landslide development was made with regard to online learning. In addition, student success and student wellbeing were priorities. On the one hand by deploying campaigns and activities to make the wellbeing of students open for discussion, and on the other hand by recruiting additional (online) psychologists and intensifying chain care for students.

In all undergraduate programmes, students were given expanded opportunities to work on realistic issues from the outside world in 'real time', challenging them to design approaches that contribute to understanding problems such as social inequality or inadequate access to health care. Personal and professional skills instruction was further developed in virtually every bachelor programme.

Most of the plans were prepared in the faculty in close consultation with the participatory bodies, in keeping with the decentralised nature of EUR. The conversation about the question 'What is educational quality?' was therefore conducted close to practice, with those directly involved. In addition, professionals and students in learning groups ('Communities of Practice') learned together and discussed developments in the educational programmes. In this way, the Quality Agreements funds contributed to a learning culture, making a recognisable contribution to the continuous improvement of the educational quality of EUR: 'Being an Erasmian; making positive societal impact'.

At the end of 2021, EUR was halfway through the period of working on the implementation plan that shapes the Quality Agreements funds: 'Working Together for World Class Education'. In December 2021, EUR started a midterm evaluation of the intermediate outcomes of all projects and programmes that are part of this implementation plan (153 projects in total). This evaluation will be completed in the first quarter of 2022. In December 2021, as a start to the midterm, four dialogues were conducted with 140 representatives from all faculties and recommendations to the faculty leadership and the Board of Trustees (BoD) were drafted. The Quality Agreements work group, appointed by the University Council to monitor the effects of the Quality Agreements funds, attended these dialogues and wrote a reflection that is included in this account. Based on this reflection, the dialogues with a broad selection of faculty representatives and the results of a panel visit by peers in the first quarter of 2022, the last part of the Quality Agreements funds will be used until 2024 to place stronger emphases on topics that will further improve educational quality.

The participatory body and the Supervisory Board (SB) are naturally closely involved.

At the end of 2021, EUR spent all funds available for the years 2019, 2020 and 2021 and even brought forward part of funds earmarked for 2022-2024. In addition, EUR invested additional internal funds when needed according to the faculties. The following section first explains the expenditures, and then the preliminary results by theme.

[1] 'Investing in Educational Quality, Quality Agreements 2019-2024' (April 2018); OCW themes following the Sector Agreement Appendix 1 (p.8); the Protocol Assessment Quality Agreements Higher Education 2019-2024 (April 2018); and the directions shared with the institutions as laid down in 'Pilot assessments annual reports 2020 Quality Agreements 2020' (November 2021) and follows up on the advice given to the institution in the 'Advisory Report Plan Assessment Quality Agreements, EUR 007856' (published February 2020).

Financial Accountability 2019-2021

EUR has an internal system to distribute financial resources fairly among eight faculties. Simply put, this means that faculties with more students receive more funds than faculties with fewer students. In addition, funds are set aside at the central level of the university for investments that support collective interfaculty facilities and the profile of EUR. With the consent of the participatory body in 2019, this method of distribution has been applied to the Quality Agreements funds. The financial accountability in this section is therefore split into a faculty section and a section that accounts for programmes organised at the institutional level.

Total expenditures of faculties

Roughly two thirds of the available Quality Agreements funds have been distributed among the faculties, according to the internal agreements mentioned above. Table 7.1 shows that all funds were fully expended. The figures are taken from the periodic accounts and the annual year-end work of the faculties.

table 7.1 Use of Quality Agreements funds by faculties EUR 2019-2021 and the forecast 2022-2024, x€ 1,000

Faculties 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Erasmus MC 310 1.035 1.239 1.547 1.633 1.633
ESHPM 135 160 272 340 358 358
ESE 895 1.062 1.787 2.267 2.376 2.376
RSM EU 760 902 1.531 1.911 2.018 2.018
ESL 710 842 1.431 1.786 1.885 1.885
ESSB 590 700 1.189 1.484 1.567 1.567
ESHCC 195 231 393 490 518 518
ESPhil 100 119 201 251 266 266
Total 3.695 5.051 8.043 10.076 10.621 10.621

As indicated in the introduction, EUR used its internal funds to make additional investments in the faculties' improvement and innovation plans. The table below provides insight into the additional 2019-2021 spending.

table 7.2 Schedule of expenditures of funds from EUR (2019-2024), x€ 1,000

Faculties 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Erasmus MC 0 929 488 0 0 0
ESHPM 169 198 81 20 2 2
ESE 213 325 0 50 0 0
RSM EU 709 1.118 383 90 0 0
ESL 529 944 387 1 0 0
ESSB 493 1.238 730 461 378 378
ESHCC 88 220 52 10 0 0
ESPhil 109 182 65 46 31 31
Total 2.310 5.154 2.186 678 412 412

Total overview of programme expenditures at the institutional level

Approximately one third of the Quality Agreements funds were spent as planned in cross-faculty initiatives: the Community for Learning and Innovation (CLI) and three additional programmes designed with the University Council: Erasmus X, Impact at the Core, and Student Wellbeing.

Based on additional plans, budgets for these central programmes have been established, with the approval of the University Council. In order to start these programmes in parallel with the faculty programmes, it was necessary to bring forward the available funds from after 2021 to realise the joint ambitions - together with the faculties. This is, of course, permitted in the Quality Arrangements Framework.

table 7.3 Overview of available Quality Agreements funds including other central programmes 2019-2024, x € 1,000

Programmes 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
CLI 1.521 1.838 1.343 2.000 2.000 2.000
ErasmusX 53 859 1.006 1.261 1.300 1.198
Impact at a Core 1 317 923 1.430 1.268 1.440
Wellbeing 76 459 480 440 440 440
Central/ntv 0 0 0 617 1.235 1.235
Total 1.651 3.473 3.752 5.748 6.243 6.313

At the end of 2021, the central programmes have not fully utilised the available budgets over the period 2019-2021, due to:

1. Problems with staff recruitment (Impact at the Core and Erasmus X).

2. Cost estimates were too high, leading to a downward adjustment of the budget for ErasmusX, for example.

3. Reservations to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 (€ 70,000 at CLI) from 2022 onwards.

Although less was spent than estimated, there was no under-utilisation of the Quality Agreements funds. Central programmes had invested € 8.876 million as at the closing date of 2021. That's 220 percent more than was needed according to the Quality Agreements budgets. It was, however, less than the projected € 11.718. This led to stricter checks on the financial outlook.

Total expenditures by theme

The Quality Agreements funds are linked to mandatory themes in the Framework. The table below provides insight into the spending per theme established by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science. 

Overview of investments by theme Quality Agreements, x € 1,000.

table 7.4 Investments by theme Quality Agreements, x €1,000

Theme Quality Agreements Budget '19 Actual '19 Budget '20 Actual '20 Budget '21 Actual '21 Budget '22 Budget '23 Budget '24
1 Small-scale and intensive 3.176 2.277 2.872 3.346 4.098 3.935 4.178 4.245 4.240
2 More and better guidance 2.958 2.294 4.632 4.028 3.675 3.169 2.704 2.608 2.608
3 Study Success 23 16 35 50 33 32 0 0 0
4 Differentiation 3.058 2.537 6.137 5.084 7.827 6.162 7.472 7.215 6.924
5 Facilities 238 151 658 639 158 145 248 251 255
6 Further professionalisation of lecturers (assignment CLI) 585 380 615 531 590 538 638 617 611
Still to be distributed 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.261 2.340 2.708
Total 10.036 7.656 14.948 13.678 16.381 13.982 16.502 17.275 17.345

Context Quality Agreements: connecting to internal vision of quality

The above themes have been internally adjusted in the 2019 implementation plan 'Working Together for World Class Education' in line with the institution's educational vision as a basis for educational quality. This was based on reflection on (a) the regulation of study advance funds up to and including 2018; (b) the recommendations of peer committees on the programme and institutional level (NVAO), and (c) at the participatory body’s and the Faculty Board’s express wishes. The themes defined by Erasmus University are summarised below.

Investing in the innovation capacity of lecturers (OCW Theme 4 and 6)

Flexible training is offered for lecturers who have a training need during their work. In addition, lecturers are offered space to initiate innovation projects with associated evidence-based research (the fellow programme). These investments are classified under OCW Theme 6: Further professionalisation of lecturers.

The additional deployment of tutors, mentors, and lecturers is partially accommodated under the OCW theme of Educational Differentiation (theme OCW 4). Education is developed and implemented with teams of lecturers, learning innovators and assistants. This led to additional time for teaching, smaller groups, and 'training on the job' for lecturers working in innovation projects. Lecturers working in teams is at the heart of EUR's strategy, with tasks divided among team members.

Personal and Professional Development and Student Wellbeing (OCW Theme 1 and 2)

The student's personal and professional development is aided by working in small groups, and by better guiding students in these smaller groups in their personal and professional development, in addition to paying attention to their resilience and wellbeing.

EUR has a relatively large group of students who are classified as ‘first-generation students’. Personal and professional development of students begins in education by challenging students to develop their competencies and skills, making students more resilient, and strengthening their mental wellbeing. As a result, students develop into academic professionals who make a difference in their future careers.

Faculties contributed investments to achieve this in a context of small scale and better mentoring.

Educational differentiation: attention to learning how to make impact and curriculum revision (OCW-4)

Educational differentiation is a big theme in all the plans. In revised programmes, particularly in undergraduate education, students learn to work with realistic problems from a professional and community engagement perspective.

To further challenge students and shape personalised learning, faculties designed online instruction and worked to provide better feedback on student learning (formative assessment). All of these investments are categorised in OCW Theme 4: Educational differentiation.

Central programmes are drivers of educational differentiation (OCW 4)

At the institutional level, in consultation with all bodies - in addition to the theme of wellbeing set out above - two substantive topics were chosen that strengthen the above innovation programmes at faculties: better connection to both the needs of the student (ErasmusX) and the field of work (Impact learning). These themes contributed to educational differentiation.

Personal and online learning (OCW Theme 4 and 5)

Many online innovations are a double-edged sword. On the one hand, work was done on appropriate online facilities. On the other hand, ways were built to make the educational environment more compatible with the various goals and target groups. Therefore, projects designed here were accounted for on both facilities (OCW Theme 5) and educational differentiation (OCW Theme 4).

The table below provides insight into the expenditures, ordered by the themes that EUR itself introduced in its implementation plan.

Table 7.5 Summary of investments in Quality Agreements funds per subject EUR x €1,000

EUR-theme Budget '19 Actual '19 Budget '20 Acrual '20 Budget '21 Actual '21 Budget '22 Budget '23 Budget '24
1 Personal and professional development (OCW1 and 2) 2.970 2.825 3.834 3.741 4.680 3.805 3.765 3.629 3.623
2 Strengthen Lecturers' Innovation Capacity (OCW 4 and 6) 3.015 2.064 3.392 3.191 4.004 3.771 3.635 3.679 3.677
3 Personal and online learning (OCW 5 and 6) 2.013 1.116 3.043 3.274 2.504 2.654 2.709 2.619 2.260
4 Wellbeing (OCW 2)) 358 76 440 459 440 480 440 440 440
5 Impact at the Core (OCW 4) 0 1 546 317 1.254 923 1.430 1.268 1.440
6 ErasmusX (OCW 4) 0 53 1.500 859 1.500 1.006 1.261 1.300 1.198
7 CLI (OCW 5 and 6) 1.680 1.521 2.194 1.838 2.000 1.343 2.000 2.000 2.000
Still to be distributed 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.261 2.340 2.708
Total 10.036 7.656 14.948 13.678 16.381 13.982 16.502 17.275 17.345
                   

Process design monitoring Quality Agreements 2019-2024

Monitoring is done in two ways. Faculties provide accountability three times a year based on the indicators as summarised in the figure below. This accountability is summarised in two reports per year. These are discussed with the Supervisory Board and with the participatory body at the central level. These reports form the basis for this annual report [2]

[2] A detailed portal has been developed that provides insight into the progress of each of the 153 projects that are part of the implementation plan for the Quality Agreements funds 'Investing in World Class Education' (2019).Measurable indicators reporting progress Quality Agreements funds

Measurable indicators reporting progress Quality Agreements funds

Requirements as set by the NVAO

Internal Reporting Requirements

  • It is clear what the intentions are

Spending by theme, by project:

  • Financial
  • Substantive progress against target (textual)
  • What progress has been made
  • Where EUR stands in relation to the measures to be implemented
  • Registration KPI
  • Explanation of substantive claim (textual)
  • What the consequences are in terms of time and content
  • Risk signalling
  •  Explanation of substantive claim (textual)
  • At central and decentralised levels
  • At the faculty level
  • At the level of central programmes

The effects on educational quality are qualitatively indicated in four Communities of Practice, in which professionals and students from the faculties learn together about how to improve educational quality. These learning communities are directed by a scholar. By the end of 2021, all interim revenue has been discussed with stakeholders in dialogues. The goal was to make sense of the outcomes in a narrative. The outcomes are set out in the report 'Four Dialogues' (December 2021).[3] 

[3]Based on a review with an external panel, for the period 2022-2024, early in 2022, we will discuss whether changes to the current plans are necessary. This process will be designed in close consultation with the participatory bodies.

Problem definition qualitative evaluation progress investment Quality Agreements funds.

Retaining

Reinforcing

What has been achieved on the themes of students’ personal and professional development, lecturer professionalisation, student wellbeing, impact learning, and online learning.

Which parts deserve to be specified in better detail.

Outcomes 2019-2021 Personal and Professional Development Students (OCW 1&2)

Table 7.6 Investments per theme EUR (OCW 1 and OCW2) x €1,000

EUR-theme Budget '19 Actual '19 Budget '20 Actual '20 Budget '21 Actual '21 Budget '22 Budget '23 Budget '24
1 Personal and Professional Development (OCW 1 and OCW 2) 2.970 2.825 3.834 3.741 4.680 3.805 3.765 3.629 3.623
2 Student Wellbeing (OCW 2) 358 76 440 459 440 480 440 440 440

Personal and Professional Development Goals

Objectives for the period 2019-2024 are set as follows:

1. Skills courses focus on personal development and connection to the career/job market.

2. Additional guidance for students takes place regardless of their background, origin and prior education, proactively and structurally.

3. Plans focus on improving prevention and chain care, as well as making mental health issues more open for discussion among students.

The preparation and implementation of the ‘Personal and professional development of students’ plans has been carried out by faculties; Student Wellbeing is a central programme collaborating with the faculties.

Spending Personal and Professional Development

Table 7.7 Overview of faculty investments Personal and Professional Development (OCW 1 and OCW2) x €1,000

Component Actual '19 Actual '20 Actual '21
ESSB 116 146 117
RSM 1.024 989 923
EsPhil 20 40 30
EMC 120 539 630
ESE 559 785 948
ESL 742 935 855
ESHCC 244 308 303
Total 2.825 3.741 3.805

KPI Personal and Professional Development

KPI to be measured from 2020 and 2021 onwards

With the outcome

Staff expansion

More and better guidance in small groups of students in skills education by better trained staff members, focused on their personal development.

Improve career prospects for tutors and mentors

Developing courses skills

Student satisfaction

Student satisfaction (KPI)

A detailed overview is available in a special publication of 'Appendices Collaborating on World Class Education' (2019). KPIs in this theme were set at:

Student satisfaction (KPI)

All 115 Personal and Professional Development skills courses at nearly all faculties between 2019 and 2021 were integrally rated positive by students: at least 4.5 out of 6, or 7 to 8 on a scale of 10.

Long-term effects at the programme level are reviewed in midterm and external evaluations, through study results in the graduation phase (Erasmus School of Law), and in alumni surveys. Given that implementation took place over the 2019-2020 (partial), 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 (not yet completed) academic year, not much can be said about the medium-term and long-term effects at the time of writing.

Results 2019-2021 Personal and Professional Development

The Personal and Professional Development tables list all faculty activities on this topic by faculty. It follows the statement of plans as submitted and approved in 2019/2020. Additional activities of the central Wellbeing programme are also shown. Below is a summary of the results at the end of 2021.

Erasmus School of History, Culture and Communication

Competency Development

Portfolio Tool for soft skills development to be implemented in the near future.

Labour Market Skills

Redesigning a number of courses with the goal of enhancing students' interaction with their future professional practice

Erasmus Medical Centre

Competency Development

Pilot skills and competency development in project teaching.

Communicating ethical dilemmas through art.

Labour Market Skills

MATCH; career development support programme for students.

Erasmus University College

Study and learning skills

Course line in the bachelor programme.

Rotterdam School of Management

Study and learning skills

Courses and platform for academic writing and research methods.

Competency Development

Personal development course line for bachelor students.

Erasmus School of Philosophy

Labour Market Skills

Course line Philosophy Workshop preparing students for the job market

Erasmus School of Law

Labour Market Skills

Within the law school's skills programme, MyFuture, bachelor students work on study and learning skills through e-modules and building a student community. The master focuses on personal leadership.

Erasmus School of Economics

Labour Market Skills

For students in the second and third bachelor years, a skills programme has been started that prepares students for their careers. The portfolio of skills subjects will be expanded in the coming years.

A total of eight training programmes have been developed for mentors and tutors since 2019 as part of the Tutor Academy of Erasmus School of Social Sciences and Behaviour (ESSB), Erasmus School of Law (ESL), Rotterdam School of Management (RSM) and Erasmus School of Economics (ESE). Furthermore, additional lecturers, tutors, mentors and coordinators were appointed. Additional Staff: 63 FTE. A career path for tutors and mentors was introduced for the ESSB and ESHPM faculties.

Qualitative evaluation personal and professional development 9 December 2021

As part of the midterm evaluation, a dialogue on personal and professional development was held with forty direct internal stakeholders and six external peers from institutions of higher education, also attended by two representatives of the central participatory body.

The main outcomes were:

  • The original goals were achieved; 
  • Tutors are appreciated by students and help students develop skills;
  • Tutoring skills of tutors have increased through Tutor Academies of faculties;
  • Alumni need to be better involved in goal setting;
  • A better connection should be made with Erasmian values;
  • The application of skills in impact projects and skills education in master programmes needs to be better specified. The advice is to put more emphasis on integral, transformational skills.

In the long(er) term, it is important to consider how to continue providing affordable and sustainable student counselling. Small-scale teaching and better feedback on the student's learning process remains the ambition here.

Results 2019-2021 Student Wellbeing (OCW 2)

table 7.8 Investment of Quality Agreements funds Students Wellbeing 2019-2021 x€ 1,000

Wellbeing (OCW 2) Budget '19 Actual '19 Budget '20 Actual'20 Budget '21 Actual '21
             
Transferred budget CLI 358 0 -48 0 -10 0
Executive vision and data collection 0 0 79 64 101 114
E-mental health app 0 75 235 267 0 0
E-platform and helpline 0 0 41 27 75 88
Living Room Project 0 1 60 57 82 82
Student support services and lectures 0 0 73 45 192 195
Total 358 76 440 459 440 480

Objectives Student Wellbeing (OCW 2)

EUR is committed to the personal wellbeing and personal development of every student, regardless of background or personal circumstances. This started a transition from emphasising study success to focusing on student success. This involves the following sub-objectives:

  • Student Living Room (KPI)

Creating a low-threshold, non-commercial place to socialise. During the lockdown periods in 2020 and from November 2021, it was necessary to shift to online activities, such as yoga, game and movie nights, and various buddy initiatives. With this online version, the Living Room managed to reach 1,600 students in 2021 (KPI: 1000). In late 2021, the Living Room opened its doors again in a central location at Woudestein campus, reaching 1,400 (KPI:1000) students in a matter of weeks. A survey of 134 students indicated that they highly value the Living Room and that the activities of the Living Room have a positive impact on their sense of wellbeing.

Survey of KPIs Student Living Room 2020-2021

KPI to be measured from 2021

With the outcome

Hosts are trained (support and referral)

Increase awareness of the living room

Two campaigns

KPI to be measured from 2022

 

1000 students reached

Centrally located living room

80 percent first-year students know the living room

Many students find their way to the living room.

50 percent of second and third-year students know the living room

45 activities annually by student associations

With a broad range of activities

20 collaborations

Activities that meet student needs

Network events

 

Target groups based on monitor

 

Satisfaction is good

 

Wellbeing Platform and Helpline (KPI)

In 2020 and 2021, the wellbeing platform on MyEur was a central place for student wellbeing initiatives, for psycho-education and low-threshold access to professional and peer support. In 2021, the platform was visited 34,000 times. This shows that the platform meets a clear need. The peer-to-peer chat service Fresh Thoughts has been part of the platform since 2021. In 2021 this service was used by 100 students. Student satisfaction is good.

Overview KPI Wellbeing Platform and Helpline 2020-2021

KPI to be measured from 2020 and 2021 onwards

With the outcome

Platform is live and provides relevant information

Low-threshold help for students

Assessment is positive, both quantitatively and in focus groups

Helpline is active

Number of visitors Fresh Thoughts (no number)

Students find information helpful

In 2020 and 2021, the wellbeing platform on MyEur was a central place for student wellbeing initiatives, for psycho-education and low-threshold access to professional and peer support. In 2020 the platform was visited ?? times, in 2021 34,000 times. This shows that the platform meets a clear need. The peer-to-peer chat service Fresh Thoughts has been part of the platform since 2021. In 2021 this service was used by 100 students. Student satisfaction is good.

.

Strengthen support to students (KPI)

Based on a baseline measurement in 2020, focus group discussions were held in 2021 with lecturers, student advisors, psychologists and students to evaluate together what services could be better organised and specified for students in what ways. Design discussions were conducted with the CLI on how to update lecturer training programmes. The outcomes will be translated into lecturer training and support services in 2022.

A short animated film was created on how to keep your study-life balance as a student, working on your studies with motivation. This animation will be used at the start of lectures starting in mid-2022. The animation refers to a clear overview of the complete support range of EUR, which runs from prevention offerings (e.g. workshops on dealing with stress or procrastination) to peer-to-peer support and online coaching by a student psychologist or an external professional. Reporting on KPI will follow in the 2022 annual report.

Furthermore, a report has been prepared as a rationale for the number of psychologists. On this basis, funded by other resources, an additional psychologist was appointed. Furthermore, online coaching was implemented and a family physician was appointed.

Overview KPI Strengthen support for students 2020-2021

KPI to be measured from 2020 and 2021 onwards

With the outcome

A Manifesto succinctly articulates the vision of well-being

Awareness of and broad support for the wellbeing vision

Workshops/focus groups with students were conducted Substantiated based on research

KPI to be measured from 2022

With the outcome

Lecturer training sessions have been updated

Professionalisation and strengthening of the support structure

Lecturer training sessions have been updatedSubstantiation of need for additional psychologists

Commitment to Caring Universities

Online coaching was implemented

General practioner was appointed

A learning community was established

Mission and Data (KPI)

In terms of data collection, EUR Student Wellbeing Monitor was conducted in early 2021. Respondents (n=4000) scored above average on stress (67%), anxiety (70%) and depression (50%). The results of the second measurement at the end of 2021 are not yet known. EUR also participated in the national Student Wellbeing Monitor (RIVM/Trimbos/GGD-GHOR) in 2021.

The results of EUR and the national monitor are consistent. Even within the national monitor, there were no notable differences between EUR and the other universities in terms of student wellbeing.

There is a high threshold for discussing stress and failure. Therefore, several encouragement events were organised in 2021. In 2021 the mission relating to student wellness was disseminated through social media and the press, the Wellness Platform, and through campaigns such as Eureka Week (August 2021), and Student Wellbeing Weeks (June and November 2021). At the end of the year, for the first time in a long time, we were able to organise wellbeing weeks live on campus again, reaching as many as 9,700 students.

Mission and Data (KPI)

KPI to be measured from 2020 and 2021 onwards

With the outcome

Design of a student monitor

Data underpins the mission and provides impetus for further development.

Publication of data on website

Internal reporting cycle provides insight into results a project

Investing in lecturers' innovation capacity

table 7.9 Faculty investment Quality Agreements funds innovation capacity lecturers x €1,000

Component Actual '19 Actual '20 Actual '21
CLI 310 455 421
EMC 0 0 23
ESSB 69 76 84
IatC 0 0 10
RSM 1 0 0
Total 380 531 538

Objectives Investing in lecturers' innovation capacity

The innovation capacity of lecturers was supported in the Community for Learning and Innovation (CLI). CLI developed an offering for lecturers that enables them to be continually engaged in strengthening the quality and innovation of their teaching, and that enables lecturers to continually adapt to societal changes, new didactic insights from science, and new technological possibilities. All sub-objectives have been met. These were:

KPI Investing in Lecturers' innovation capacity

Sub-objectives lecturer professionalisation CLI 2019-2021.

KPI to be measured from 2020 and 2021 onwards

With the outcome

10 MicroLabs per year

Lecturer professionalisation is updated or focal points in the educational vision and is in line with theneeds of lecturers. Innovations are evidence based.

2021: 850 participants

Satisfaction 7/10

20 Fellowships per year

Micro-labs are short 'how to' modules for EUR lecturers on specific educational issues. The goal was to develop thirty micro-labs and for five hundred lecturers to participate. A total of 26 micro-labs were developed in which 934 lecturers participated, a group consisting of 749 individual lecturers. During the COVID crisis, all MicroLabs converted to a fully online variant very quickly.

Activities related to educational innovation and digitisation mostly focused on the impact of COVID-19. During the COVID crisis, additional instructional materials on online teaching and assessment were made available online. Also, 'teachEUR' was delivered, the online design tool for lecturers. Several interactive webinars were provided, including the 'Online interaction and tool experience' and 'Online assessment'. A total of 191 lecturers participated in the teachEUR webinars in 2020.

The goal was to have twenty active fellows per year active. A total of 19 fellowships were completed by the end of 2021; 8 fellowship pathways are in the final phase and 11 are still in the research phase. The fellows' research focused primarily on skills education, motivation and student wellbeing. A list of topics is set out in Chapter 11.

Through COVID-19, many training and innovation activities were conducted online. The proportion of lecturers who participated in a fellowship or requested an improvement programme at the CLI decreased, as lecturers experienced a high workload from converting their teaching to an online learning environment.

However, through the practical support of the learning innovators at the faculties and the many online facilities offered by the CLI, professionalisation of lecturers did take place. Among other things, the collaboration had the following results:

  • Quickly setting up a facility for remote assessment through digital tests and online proctoring, ensuring that examinations could go ahead.
  • Providing didactic support for online teaching and assessment through the Ll teams.

Lecturer satisfaction (KPI)

On 13 December 2021, a dialogue took place with lecturers from all faculties, led by an independent moderator and attended by peers from other educational institutions. In addition to a high level of satisfaction with the course offerings provided by CLI, members of the Community of Practice indicated that it is necessary to invest in the time lecturers are given to make a substantial connection with students. Further, people indicated that the Erasmian values for lecturers could be better emphasised.

Personal and Online Learning (OCW Themes 4 and 5)

table 7.10 Financial justification personal and online learning x €1,000

  Actuals 2019 Actuals 2020 Actuals 2021
Digitisation projects 490 522 154
Innovation Projects 677 430 228
Interactive tool for lecturers 90 70 46
Student Projects 3 128 181
Professional development of lecturers  220  385 375
CLI Fellows  41  303 285
ErasmusU_Online projects     74
Total 1521 1838 1343

Objectives personal and online learning (OCW themes 4 and 5)

Personal and Online Learning focuses on revamping the online learning environment for students so they are better challenged. Innovations allow students to (a) learn off-campus, on their own time, (b) receive more and better feedback on learning, and (c) ensure that instruction can be tailored to meet specific student learning needs.

Faculties devote considerable attention to the design of an online learning environment, but the impetus and development function of the CLI are crucial. By the end of 2021, the CLI contributed to eighty projects in collaboration with faculties, 25 of which have not yet been completed. This is usually at the request of lecturers and the Learning Innovation Teams who want to redesign an educational component.

The COVID-19 pandemic put the original plans for hybrid and more personalised learning in a different light. It led to a boom in distance education, investing in tools to strengthen online didactics in distance education. In addition to extensive technical support, the CLI provided many workshops, webinars and toolkits for lecturers to teach their classes online (see: Strengthen Lecturers' innovation capacity). The goals regarding more personalised learning pathways or a new design of hybrid learning, for example based on serious gaming, remained more in the background due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In the coming period up to 2024, this topic will receive greater emphasis.

KPI Personal and Online Learning

Results 2019-2020 Personal and Online Learning

KPI 2019- 2021 to be measured

With the outcome

CLI: 150 projects

Strengthening online learning environment

Implementation of blended lecture courses (ESE)

Enable synchronous education

Adaptive education (Erasmus MC, ESE)

Better matching of initial student situation

Simulation games (ESHCC)

Better connection to the labour market

Interdisciplinary learning (ESPHIL)

Better connection to the labour market

Results 2019-2021 Personal and Online Learning

A total of 240 courses were updated (partly by COVID19) and four projects related to assessment were completed (ESSB). Student satisfaction is generally fair to good (3.5 or higher on a 5-point scale, and 7 or higher on a 10-point scale). The improved courses better meet the initial situation and motivation of the student, for example based on serious gaming (ESHCC) or adaptive modules (Erasmus MC), enabling learning independent of time and place. An example is the knowledge clips of the Faculty of Economics. Students prepare education at home to be better prepared for work groups.

Furthermore, online tooling was used to have students collaborate in simulations or (interdisciplinary) cases (Eshphil).

By the end of 2021, CLI collaborated on eighty projects in collaboration with faculties, 25 of which have not yet been completed. The new round of projects in 2021 has been postponed. Following an in-depth evaluation and conceptualisation of online education after COVID-19, a new investment plan will be developed from 2022 and support will resume. The overviews in Chapter 11 provide a summary of the various projects.

In December, a dialogue was held with thirty staff members from faculties and two peers from higher education institutions in order to interpret the outcomes of all 'online learning' projects. The conclusion was that the concept of online learning needs to be further developed. The function of online learning in knowledge transfer needs to be established, as does the application of knowledge to solve problems and the personal education of the student. In doing so, making teaching individualised may be necessary, but thinking through more carefully how online didactics can contribute to better learning outcomes should be paramount. The CLI has been able to set aside funds by postponing projects to contribute to the quality of online learning at EUR in the period 2022-2024. They will do so based on a revised plan following the midterm evaluation.

A total of 240 courses were adapted by all faculties (partly by COVID-19) and four projects related to assessment were completed (at ESSB). Student satisfaction is generally fair to good (3.5 or higher on a 5-point scale, and 7 or higher on a 10-point scale). The improved courses better meet the initial situation and motivation of the student, for example based on serious gaming (ESHCC) or adaptive modules (Erasmus MC), enabling learning independent of time and place. An example is the knowledge clips of the Faculty of Economics. Students prepare education at home to be better prepared for work groups. Furthermore, online tooling was used to have students collaborate in simulations or (interdisciplinary) cases (Eshphil).

By the end of 2021, CLI collaborated on eighty projects in collaboration with faculties, 25 of which have not yet been completed. The new round of projects in 2021 has been postponed. Following an in-depth evaluation and conceptualisation of online education after COVID-19, a new investment plan will be developed from 2022 and support will resume. The overviews in Chapter 11 provide a summary of the various projects.

Satisfaction with personal and online learning

In December, a dialogue was held with thirty staff members from faculties and two peers from higher education institutions in order to interpret the outcomes of all 'online learning' projects. The conclusion was that the concept of online learning needs to be further developed. The function of online learning in knowledge transfer needs to be established, as does the application of knowledge to solve problems and the personal education of the student. In doing so, making teaching individualised may be necessary, but thinking through more carefully how online didactics can contribute to better learning outcomes should be paramount.

The CLI has been able to set aside funds by postponing projects to contribute to the quality of online learning at EUR in the period 2022-2024. They will do so based on a revised plan following the midterm evaluation.

Impact learning (OCW 4)

table 7.11 The financial actuals x€ 1000

Component Budget '19 Actuals '19 Budget '20 Actuals '20 Budget '21
IatC 0 1 546 317 1.254

Objectives Impact at the Core

Impact at the Core began in 2020 and is aimed at developing impact education. The main goal is offering education at least once to every student in every EUR study programme in 2024, working with direct stakeholders from outside the university on social and/or transition issues.

Sub-objectives for the period 2020 and 2021 were:

  • Developing courses, didactic approaches and forms of assessment within the limits of Dutch law and in line with EUR’s ambitions.
  • Designing this education to be affordable and feasible, given large student numbers and lecturer workloads.
  • Researching and implementing tools in the learning environment that support impact learning and ensure the quality of education:
  1. A digital system in which companies/governments, lecturers and students can carry out projects together.
  2. Lecturer professionalisation (develop and provide).
  • Sharing knowledge in a Community of Practice. Working with students and lecturers to learn from the many experiments and to provide lecturers with an opportunity for peer review.

KPI Impact at the Core

KPI 2020/2021

With the outcome

Each programme (Bsc/Msc) gives students at least one opportunity to solve a real time, ‘wicked’ problem. Realisation see table 714

A learning environment and well-trained lecturers enable students to make sense of major challenges in the outside world with external stakeholders

KPI 2020/2021Each programme (Bsc/Msc) gives students at least one opportunity to solve a real time, ‘wicked’ problem. Realisation see table 714Each faculty has a vision onimpact learning. Realisation: postponed to the end of 2024.

There is a support system for lecturers to organise impact learning. Realisation: purchase Riipen. Start implementation.

A micro-lab for lecturers is available. Realised in 2021.

All faculties participate in a Community of Practice with 134 active members. Realised in 2021.

KPI 2022 and beyond

 
Scaling up the number of initiatives. Realisation in 2024.

There is a coherent didactic framework that summarises what impact learning means at the institutional level.

Defining a didactic Realisation in 2024.

Impact learning is included in OER every programme Realisation in 2024.

Impact learning in bachelor programmes (KPI)

In 2020 and 2021, with the help of the programme Impact at the Core eighteen projects were implemented in which approximately 2,000 students participated. The emphasis was on bachelor education. For the period after 2022, the emphasis is more on master education.

The projects are summarised in the overview below. A comprehensive overview of the projects and programmes has been attached as an appendix to the annual report.

Rotterdam School of Management

The bachelor internship abroad programme I DO was offered for the second time to a group of 60 students. Former students were trained as coaches through a developed leadership module. Within I DO, the stakeholder platform Rijpen was also tested for the first time.Within the master programmes, efforts are made to integrate experiential learning and developing transferable skills to make a positive impact.Outcomes contribute to didactics for impact education and an affordable and feasible educational model for impact learning. 













Erasmus School of Philosophy

The bachelor introduced an internship in which students are asked to find a challenge in the city/region and make it open for discussion together with parties.Outcomes contribute to impact education didactics and an affordable and viable educational model for impact learning.








Erasmus School of Social and Behaviour Sciences

For the second year in a row, Impact at the Core evaluated how students, businesses and municipalities work together in the Design Workshop of the Public Administration Master. What does work? What doesn't work?Outcomes contribute to didactics for impact education.

















Erasmus Medical Centre

How do you get students to design projects in the city in a challenging curriculum? Impact at the Core supervised pilot of project-based education at Erasmus MC.Outcomes contribute to didactics for impact education.














Erasmus School of Law

Work has been done within the Law bachelor programme to pilot an integrative course that brings together three areas of law. A clinic has been developed within the master International and European Union Law to be started as a pilot in 2022. Work has also been done to make the masters in criminology, private law and financial law more practice-oriented.



Erasmus School of Health Policy Management

At ESHPM, a better guidance and assessment model was designed with lecturers in the Technology and Innovation course of the bachelor Health Sciences programme.Outcomes contribute to didactics for impact education.

EUR-Breed

The multidisciplinary honours programme ‘Tackling Inequalities' worked on the student's reflexive skills and collaboration with social stakeholders.In the 'Impact Space' work has been done to create new didactic interventions and to create a more open learning environment where students work on new (impact) skills.

 

In June 2021, the vice-Deans of Education of all faculties agreed to develop a pilot ‘impact space’ in the third year of bachelor programmes. The goal is to facilitate each student in the third year to choose a social challenge that can be prepared during the minor and thesis phase. Students then graduate, for example, on a design or approach to an important social challenge. Work on realisation of this goal will start in 2022.

Retrieve issues from the environment (KPI)

EUR retrieves issues from its immediate environment. In 2021, two 'impact education dialogues' were organised, where both individuals from the education system and stakeholders from society had a round table talk about how education better connects to social issues. The first dialogue focused on the healthcare domain and, among other things, addressed the importance of technology, ethics and interdisciplinarity. Administrators from healthcare institutions and from the Ministry of VWS (Public Health, Welfare and Sport) stressed the importance of having students work with concrete issues during their studies. In October, a dialogue was held with Medicine Students In Society (GIDS) at Erasmus MC about the importance of technology in medical education.

Training for lecturers (KPI)

Together with the CLI, Impact at the Core developed a micro-lab and a separate introduction to the impact-driven education webinar that was launched in 2021.

Easier collaborative learning with the outside world: a support system (KPI)

As the first university in Europe, a stakeholder platform was also purchased to strengthen and enable collaboration between the teaching world and the outside world within the learning environment. After a pilot phase, this platform will be further introduced in 2022.

Innovative Space: Erasmus X

table 7.12 The financial actuals x€ 1000 (specification in detail follows in ‘Sub-statements at the institutional and faculty level'

Component Budget '19 Actuals '19 Budget '20 Actuals '20 Budget '21 Actuals '21
EURx 0 53 1.400 859 1.600 1.006

Objectives Erasmus X

Erasmus X is an innovation lab working on future-oriented education. This means that education takes place in an environment that suits the personal preferences of the students. Co-creation occupies an important place in future-oriented education, as does the use of emerging technologies. Erasmus X has three main goals: Further develop EdTech, design complex innovations with external stakeholders, and collaborative design with students (co-creation).

In 2020 and 2021, the COVID-19 pandemic had a major impact on education in general and the Erasmus X projects in particular. Projects with strong co-creation that required physical presence were dropped. Erasmus X proved to be very flexible and innovative, developing new projects in 2020 aimed at dealing with the effects of COVID-19. By applying Erasmus X, students were still able to be part of a community and able to think of and implement new solutions for their education together with Erasmus X. Together with Erasmus X, Students developed an Erasmus Minecraft Campus, an online learning environment and didactic design for the Pre Academic Programme (focused on personal leadership development) and the Erasmus X Minor. Great example projects from 2021 are described below.

In 2021, Utrecht University of the Arts (HKU), lecturers of the Erasmus School of Law and educational entrepreneurs from ErasmusX developed a completely new online environment where game-based learning has been applied as a basis for the new course Tech*Legal (BA Erasmus School of Law). The 1,500 students (both full-time and part-time) can work in small groups in online virtual escape rooms or individually via Canvas to follow and complete the course. This project was developed and implemented in co-creation with lecturers, the Learning and Innovation team of ESL, full-time and part-time students and the EUR I department. The outcomes and impacts of the project are being studied and will be published in mid-2022.

As a follow-up to the experiment in the academic year 2020-2021, the framework for programmatic assessment in the Minor Future Learning with EdTech has been further developed. One of the questions in 2020-2021 was: ‘Can the programmatic assessment model also be used in faculties with a large student population?’ To answer the scalability question, ErasmusX went to work with a redesign of the framework, resulting in a so-called 'solo taxonomy framework'. This solo framework was tested for student usability in academic year 2021-2022 and will be tested for scalability in the new LDE-CEL minor in 2022-2023.

Minecraft Campus and game-based Tech*Legal: ‘contextual’ online learning

The Minecraft campus was developed in 2020 and allows students to engage in social and learning activities during lockdowns. And it does more than that. It provides students with a different, challenging and virtual learning environment where they learn together. In 2021, the concept was adopted by TU Delft and a number of universities of applied sciences in the Netherlands. ErasmusX further developed the platform for EUR. Students learned to develop problem-solving skills in a game. In 2021, 1,200 sessions were organised. The average user walked no less than an hour across our online campus. In November 2021, Erasmus X was awarded a prize for Best in Class for best virtual campus. The award is an initiative of The Class Foundation and is aimed at finding solutions to the lack of student housing. In addition to the Minecraft Campus, Erasmus X experimented with similar online learning environments. One of the virtual environments that proved to lend itself best to education is the technological platform Gather Town.

Evidence Based

Currently, Erasmus X is conducting research into the impact of game-based learning on student motivation and the impact of a virtual learning environment on sense of belonging.

Lecturer driven

A concrete output for the university is that Erasmus X is working on developing blueprints that will be shared with all faculties to stimulate game-based learning. Interim revenues and game concepts were shared at the CLI bEURs event in October 2021 and the annual LDE-CEL event in December 2021. As a spin-off from this first experiment, a course for the master in innovation at RSM (Design Doing) is currently being developed by Erasmus X in co-creation with students in Gather Town. Finally, on 17 December 2021, over 20 lecturers from different faculties participated in a first event relating to game-based learning at EUR. Several activities will be hosted around this theme in 2022.

Fail Fast Forward: the importance of failure and resilience

The fact that failure is equally informative and can also help in the pursuit of excellence and high performance is often disregarded. To engage with lecturers and students about failure and resilience, Erasmus X has launched a series of workshops focusing on these themes. The workshops were held five times in 2021. The workshops bring students, lecturers and the academic community into conversation about failure and resilience. Participants exchange practical tips. By 2022, this workshop will be provided at least once a month in collaboration with factulties. In addition, ErasmusX, in collaboration with ESL and EUC, is also designing a failure/resiliency track within the faculties and a tutor training programme for the tutors and student advisors/coaches involved.

Safe Space

In addition to driving education-related innovations, EUR is committed to promoting an innovative organisational culture. A safe experimentation space is a prerequisite for an innovative organisational culture. Such a space not only has physical aspects, like the new physical location at Nassaukade in Rotterdam-Zuid, but also mental aspects, such as a specific mindset regarding failure and resilience as essential elements of the learning process; for example, see the Fail Fast Forward workshops.

Findings of the Supervisory Board and University Council

The Quality Committee of the Supervisory Board takes note of occasional measures that serve to strengthen the quality of education. In 2021, this concerned the further implementation of the resources resulting from the Quality Agreements, as well as the planning regarding the resources resulting from the National Programme for Education.

Quality Agreements

The Quality Committee was heavily involved in the planning phase in 2019 and 2020. The committee spoke with representatives of innovation programmes on Wellbeing, Impact Learning, the Community of Learning and Innovation, and the Innovation Space. These conversations focused on the goals, progress, and effects on educational quality. In addition, the Quality Committee received an integral report twice a year regarding progress on input and output indicators, financial realisation and risk factors. The Quality Committee was involved in the design of the midterm evaluation and was informed of the outcomes of the discussions with the learning communities on the various themes in December 2021.

National Programme for Education

The Quality Committee was briefed on the budget planning of NPO funds, specifically focused on student wellbeing, student inflow and advancement, and the progress of research for scholars with temporary appointments. Because implementation began in the third quarter of 2021 and far-reaching measures were again taken in the fourth quarter under COVID-19, the Quality Commission does not yet have sufficient insight into the effects of the funds.

The Supervisory Board notes that it is closely involved in the design of the plans with regard to educational quality. Although there are still areas for improvement with regard to further tightening of the monitoring of the effects on educational quality, the Supervisory Board sees a clear strengthening of the quality culture. Many interfaculty collaborations involve learning and working together on topics of educational quality such as impact learning. The way in which cooperation takes place, as well as the way in which increasing insight is provided into the effects on the quality of education, lead to the satisfaction of the Supervisory Board. The Board experienced the conversation with the Board of Trustees as positive and is confident that intensifying the conversation with the institution's participation will lead to further clarification and definition.

Findings University Council

This document serves as a short reflection of the HoKa Workgroup of the University Council (UC) regarding the developments of the HoKa investments in the past four years. This reflection is given in the context of the mid-term evaluation of HoKa, which is made in the entire university in different faculties and central levels of the organization. It is important to notice that this document was written by the current members of the HoKa Workgroup of the UC; most of these members started working on HoKa-related themes in the academic year 2021-2022, which means that they were not present in the drafting and establishment of the HoKa related plans of the university. However, they possess a very global view of HoKa by communicating with colleagues, studying the current plans, and discussing with the different teams in charge of managing the investments.

In order to properly reflect on various aspects of the investments, this document is structured in four sections. Firstly, the HoKa Workgroup will give a short global overview of the strengths and weaknesses of the innovation system that comes from HoKa investments. Secondly, there will be a short review of each of the projects that co-create with the HoKa Workgroup (Student Wellbeing, Impact at the Core, and Erasmus X). Thirdly, there will be a commentary of how the Workgroup perceives some of the HoKa-experiences from other participatory bodies at a faculty and program-level. Lastly, some conclusions and recommendations from the HoKa Workgroup will be given.

1. Global overview of the HoKa investments from the HoKa Workgroup

The HoKa Workgroup considers that there are a few advantages and disadvantages to the current scheme in which the investments are set. The current investments have proven to be effective in boosting bottom-up ideas for the improvement of education at EUR. HoKa has united different levels of university participation and management teams on the common goal of making education better. Additionally, the extra funding from the HoKa means has given room for necessary links between faculties at the university, which allows for the emergence of more interdisciplinary education. Lastly, some of the projects have allowed for inexpensive and sustainable initiatives that could continue in the university even without the income of the HoKa funds, as new structures have been founded in the university.

However, the HoKa investments also present a lot of challenges and weaknesses. In order to coordinate different levels of management, there are many bureaucratic needs to fulfill, which makes HoKa projects less flexible than desired due to the time it takes to make changes in the plans. Furthermore, there is uncertainty about the investments of HoKa, as the university is not sure on structural income for HoKa funds. Thus, this uncertainty limits the possibility of some project managers planning educational improvements in the long term that require structural funding. This point aligns with uncertainties over the student growth at EUR, as it appears from the HoKa reporting that only a small fraction of students is being impacted by HoKa while the student population is growing extensively.

Additionally, from a participatory-body perspective, the monitoring of HoKa can be confusing. The HoKa plans were drafted four years ago, and the participation bodies are re-established every academic year with new members. Therefore, there is a lack of continuity in the monitoring of the project, which can lead to contradicting opinions on the best path to achieve the originally drafted goals. Another point of attention is the balance between different staff members being hired through HoKa funds. For instance, there is a question of whether there is enough academic staff and support staff joining the university, or if the staff is more related to managerial positions.

Lastly, one of the most difficult challenges to deal with regarding HoKa is the complexity of measurability on the improvement of quality of education. As there are many factors involved in the experience of education for EUR students, participatory members of different levels of the university have explained that they are unable to determine whether education is directly improving because of HoKa, or if other factors are more influential in boosting the quality of education.

2. Central EUR HoKa Projects

2.1 Student Wellbeing

The project of Student Wellbeing has been developing different sub-projects in the last academic years. There are four subprojects within the Student Wellbeing Program: (1) Student Support Services and Lecturers, (2) E-Platform and Helpline, (3) Student Living Room, and (4) Mission and Data. Overall, the Student Wellbeing Program has worked hard and made progress in most projects but also encountered difficulties (due COVID-19). For example, a chain of care has been mapped out and a video regarding mental wellbeing has been made (Student Support Services and Lecturers). Data collection using the EUR Student Wellbeing Monitor and the online Student Wellbeing Platform is ongoing (E-Platform and Helpline, and Mission and Data). However, the project team had trouble with finding a suitable location with good visibility on campus Woudestein for the Student Living Room.

The University Council representatives meet with the Student Wellbeing project team approximately twice a month. During these meetings the project leads give updates on the subprojects and there is time for discussion with and input from the representatives. The workgroup believes that their input and questions are appreciated. However, there are some concerns regarding the communication with the project team and procedure outside of the meetings. The reason for this was when a topic concerning Student Wellbeing was put on the UC's agenda (i.e., voting on Living Room switching locations with UC office) without the workgroup being informed by the project team beforehand. As a consequence, the workgroup felt somewhat left out and unprepared. After discussing this with the project team, the workgroup feels confident in the collaboration between the UC and the Student Wellbeing project team in the future, as long as we are informed on time.

The workgroup sees immense potential in the Student Wellbeing project, in particular in LiveVersity and the career service. Therefore, the workgroup would like to suggest the Student Wellbeing program to explore a possible collaboration between the Living Room and LiveVersity (wellbeing courses) and career services (workshops). This will not only distinguish the Living Room from more general study spaces, but also increase visibility of the Personal Professional Development of Students projects

2.2 Impact at the Core

In the past two years, much has already been achieved in the Impact at the Core project. Educational innovations that fall under this project have been initiated in programs at almost all schools at EUR. These innovations cover a wide range of possible ways to implement the idea of having students work on actual challenging problems in modern society. Additionally, through workshops/meetings, the project team has reached out to members of the Erasmus community who are interested in the topic of creating impact. During these meetings participants were informed about innovations, but they were also asked for their own ideas, which stimulates involvement and enables the possibility of co-creation. Furthermore, important practical matters have been arranged to facilitate the involvement of external stakeholders, such as the contract with Riipen and cooperation with Erasmus Verbindt.

The University Council is satisfied with the way it has been involved in the project. The UC regularly received updates on various aspects of the project. Discussions have always been open with enough room for the Council to ask (critical) questions, express opinions and suggest ideas. In short, the UC is positive about the project so far. For the coming two years, the Council sees five main challenges related to the project. Firstly, the project has been successful in providing support to the schools through its learning innovators and project officers. While there is a growing demand for such support, the capacity for providing it is limited and not easily increased with the current labor market. This may threaten the number of educational innovations that can successfully be implemented. Secondly, a proper assessment for impact-related education is a challenge in itself, and it requires the development of tools and training for lecturers.

Thirdly, the UC is aware that the evaluation of the effectiveness of the various innovations still must take place. Yet, the Council is looking forward to the results of these evaluations and expect them to be based (among other things) on solid academic research. Fourthly, while almost all schools have educational innovations underway that fall under Impact at the Core, some schools are more involved than others. Ideally, all the schools would make a clear commitment and show willingness to exchange experiences and ideas. Only in this way, the projects can have an EUR-wide impact in the longer term. Lastly, the workshops/meetings appear to attract relatively few students and their perspective may be lacking during the development of innovations. More involvement of students could enhance the effectiveness of the whole project.

2.3 Erasmus X

Looking at EURx’ current progress through the light of the mission statement, vision and goals from the Transformation Map document, judging from the experiences and observations of the representatives, the outlook to meet the goals is rather positive. Given the limitations of possible ending of HoKa financing in the coming years, EURx is prepared to create long-lasting changes and value for the Erasmian community. Over the coming years, EURx is set to increase spending on developing university innovation culture and develop knowledge for the organization. Given the limitations, EURx is not set to start new projects, but develop ones that are already being developed or in the pipeline. Furthermore, UC representatives are positive about the prospects of the new location in the South of Rotterdam, as it has the potential to become a hub connecting Rotterdam youth and societal partners to create value for both Rotterdam and Erasmian communities in an engaging way. The location can be a valuable bridge between the university in the North of the city with the diverse and vibrant community in Rotterdam South.

The representatives of the HoKa Workgroup meet twice a month with EURx management team. The first sessions were aimed at presenting the representatives with the projects and progress of EURx. Over this period, members of the Council visited the Minecraft campus during a scavenger hunt and were present at the unofficial opening of the location of EURx in the Southern part of Rotterdam. The last meetings with EURx were centered on the budget, where the UC representatives had extensive time to ask questions and give feedback on their concerns about the budget and discuss it with the taskforce and the whole University Council. After their questions were answered, the UC members recommended to their colleagues the consent on the Budget of the project.

3. Experiences of other Participatory Bodies

The HoKa Workgroup has been in direct contact with various participatory bodies at the university to discuss the status of the HoKa funds. From the different discussions, the Workgroup can identify various points of concern coming from the decentralized representatives. Among them, it is possible to recognize some bureaucratic issues arising from the complicated institutional system behind HoKa; participatory bodies have trouble finding the correct channels to apply to innovation-related grants. Additionally, the participatory bodies explained that they perceive a lack of transparency when it comes to the overview of HoKa projects. Some faculties have experienced difficulties contacting their L&I representatives, as well as the CLI.

Furthermore, the setting in which HoKa is established hampers the continuity in the monitoring of the projects from participation, as council and program committee members change every one or two years. The COVIDpandemic has also set important challenges for the decentralized investments of HoKa. As plans were set in pre-pandemic time, their adaptation has been complex during the pandemic. In conclusion, although the HoKa funds have been able to provide a boost to some program-related initiatives, it is difficult to see the progress of the activities due to bureaucratic, practical, and pandemic-related reasons.

4. Recommendations

- The university should provide adequate & systematic training for new members of participatory bodies on HoKa.

- The university should plan discussion on what will happen when there are no more HoKa funds within all levels of the institution.

- EUR should aim for the embedment of different HoKa projects within the structural funds of the university due to the uncertainty over the continuity of HoKa.

- The different L&I representatives should facilitate flexibility in the adjustment of HoKa projects.

- The university should facilitate channels of discussion in order to boost exchange between different levels of management and participation, as well as cooperation between faculties.

Detail Statements

Please download detail statements by clicking here.

Next chapter: 8. National Programme for Education and use of corona funds

Logo Reporting
Version:
v3.8.11
Supplier:
iWink

With Reporting you can create professional online publications. Reports that you can publish online, in print and as PDF download.

And with that you immediately comply with the WCAG legislation on digital accessibility.

Simple, safe and efficient.

More about Reporting