Evaluation of "Lucian Blaga" University

From EiWiki

Revision as of 20:50, 2 February 2014

This report is the result of the evaluation of Lucian Blaga University, Sibiu. The evaluation took place in December 2012 and February 2013 in the framework of the project “Performance in Research, Performance in Teaching – Quality, Diversity, and Innovation in Romanian Universities”, which aims at strengthening core elements of Romanian universities, such as their autonomy and administrative competences, by improving their quality assurance and management proficiency.

Such evaluations are taking place within the context of major reforms in the Romanian higher education system, and specifically in accordance with the provisions of the 2011 Education Act and the various related normative documents. Whilst institutional evaluations are taking place in the context of an overall reform, each university is being assessed by an independent team, under the authority of Institutional Evaluation Programme.

Evaluators

The evaluation team (hereinafter named the team) consisted of:

• Professor Carles Solà, former Rector, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain, Team chair
• Professor Jean-Pierre Gesson, former President, University of Poitiers, France
• Professor Karol Izydor Wysokinski, former Vice-Rector for Research and International Collaboration, Uniwersytet Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej (UMCS) Lublin, Poland
• Ms Camilla Georgsson, student, Linköping University, Sweden (for first visit)
• Ms Liliya Ivanova, student, University of National and World Economy, Bulgaria (for second visit)
• Dr Raymond Smith, former Academic Registrar, London Metropolitan University, United Kingdom, Team coordinator.

The team would like to thank the Rector, Professor Ioan Bondrea, and our institutional liaison, the Vice-Rector for Organisational and Financial Strategy, Professor Livia Ilie, for their considerable support in this IEP visit to Lucian Blaga University. The team is very grateful to the staff and students of the university who have spent time meeting us and helped us to understand how the university operates. The team was very impressed with their enthusiasm and willingness to share their views and opinions.

Self-evaluation Process

The self-evaluation process was undertaken by a team comprising the following:

• Professor Livia Ilie, Vice-Rector, Organisational and Financial Strategy
• Professor Claudiu Kifor, Vice-Rector for Research and Doctoral Studies
• Associate Professor Marian Tiplic, Academic Vice-Rector
• Associate Professor Ramona Todericiu, Deputy Administrative Director
• Dr Daniela Preda, Director of International Relations Office
• Professor Liviu Rosca, Dean, Faculty of Engineering
• Associate Professor Silva Marginean, Faculty of Economic Sciences
• Associate Professor Eva-Nicoleta Burdusel, Faculty of Letters and Arts
• Assistant Professor Lucian Lobont, Quality Assurance Department
• Associate Professor Horatiu Rusu, Research Department
• Diana Lupu, Student, Faculty of Engineering
• Marius Smarandoiu, Student, Faculty of Medicine

The self-evaluation report of the Lucian Blaga University, Sibiu together with the appendices, was sent to the evaluation team in November 2012. The visits of the evaluation team to Lucian Blaga University, Sibiu took place from 9 to 11 December 2012 and from 3 to 6 February 2013, respectively. In between the visits to Lucian Blaga University, Sibiu provided the evaluation team with some additional documentation.

Reporting

Governance and Institutional Decision-making

more on Governance and Institutional Decision-making at LBU

It was clear to the team that the university had approached this international evaluation process with serious intent. The university saw the benefits of such a self-evaluation process in the context of the need to respond to the on-going economic difficulties in Europe and the reform of the higher education system in Romania.

Teaching and Learning

more on Teaching and Learning at LBU

The components of the three-tier Bologna system are present in the academic structure at LBUS. As the SER notes, however, the academic autonomy of the university is constrained by the number of places allowed by ARACIS on Bachelor and Masters programmes and the nationally prescribed elements of the curriculum. The team were advised that, in respect of Bachelor programmes, the university only had academic discretion over 20% of the curriculum and that all study programmes had to be firstly authorised and then accredited by ARACIS and comply with nationally determined academic standards and criteria. LBUS is reviewing its Masters programmes as not all of them offer the opportunity to pursue doctoral studies.

Research

more on Research at LBU

LBUS embeds research and knowledge transfer into many aspects of its mission and strategic goals. The team was fully supportive of this approach but found it difficult to clearly define the overall direction of research in the university, some of the ways in which it was organised and ways in which research output was funded and evaluated. In addition to these issues some of the metrics relating to the supervision of research students were not altogether transparent.

Service to Society

more on Service to Society at LBU

The team were able to discuss the university’s relationship with the city and the wider region with the Mayor of Sibiu and a group of employers and alumni. There is, understandably, an emphasis in the university’s SER on being an active member of the local community and also reference to positive partnerships with City Hall and major companies operating in the Sibiu region. The involvement of the university in organising the arrangements for Sibiu’s period as European City of Culture in 2007 still provides a point of reference in the university for such partnership. Yet, it seemed to the team from its meetings that there could be a greater and improved dynamic between the university and the city. There was clearly a shared desire to see a comprehensive university with a student population at its current level but there appeared to be no shared projects — outside the cultural field — between City Hall and the university. It was suggested, for example, that there might be opportunities for involving the faculty of engineering in projects. More generally, there was a desire from employers, endorsed by the team, to see an increase in practical training for students at the university.

Quality culture

more on Quality culture at LBU

6.1 The team noted that, in recent years, there had been an active debate in the university concerning the theory and practice of quality assurance and enhancement. The university had also been open to external scrutiny in this area. The rector and his management team were clearly keen to provide fresh impetus to this debate and to improve staff engagement in quality processes and the wider culture relating to quality enhancement. The SER and, in particular, the appendix on quality functional units, set out the university’s processes for assuring and enhancing the quality of its academic provision. As part of the evaluation of quality culture across the university the team met with staff and students in a number of faculties. It emerged strongly from these meetings that the information and data required to scrutinise performance on programmes were either not available or only obtainable with some significant difficulty. For example, both staff and students confirmed to the team that the student feedback mechanisms faced a range of problems including poor student response rates, a lack of feedback to students, results of student feedback not being provided to professors, and some professors not responding to the feedback. There was the view at both faculty and central levels of the university that the existing quality processes and mechanisms were not working as effectively as they could.