Prochain webinaire #3 CAEI - Le rôle des langues dans la mobilité de la connaissance dans les Amériques
Patrick Chardenet, Responsable de l’antenne Amérique latine, Agence universitaire de la Francophonie (AUF)
Mai 22, 2013, 14h00 (heure de Montréal, Canada). Langue: Français
La francophonie universitaire et scientifique joue un rôle dans la construction d'un espace interuniversitaire américain à la fois intégré et ouvert sur le monde. À cet égard, l'Agence universitaire de la Francophonie (AUF) favorise les différents types de mobilité internationale des chercheurs et des étudiants. Ces mobilités sont mises en œuvre dans un cadre plurilingue faisant du français parmi les autres langues, un vecteur du savoir dans un continuum variable, entre la production, la diffusion et l´enseignement des connaissances. De Monterrey à Montréal, de São Paulo à Moncton, de Buenos Aires à Port-au-Prince en passant par Dakar, Paris, Beyrouth ou Hanoï, la francophonie universitaire stimule la recherche et l’enseignement comme facteurs d’un développement durable partagé.
Ce Webinaire sera l’occasion de présenter les principes de cette politique et leur application par des exemples d´actions de mobilités mises en œuvre par l’AUF avec ses universités membres, ainsi que leurs perspectives dans l’université de demain.

Departmental, faculty or institutional teams are invited to join the EQUIP change programme.
The Evidence-informed quality improvement programme (EQUIP) is the latest change programme from the HEA and aims to help higher education providers take an evidence-informed approach to quality enhancement.
The programme is designed to enable providers to interpret internal and external data and work towards developing policies and practices to improve the quality of the student learning experience.
The HEA’s change team will provide support and expertise in change processes and organisational development. Previous institutional participants in the EQUIP change programme include The Open University, the University of Huddersfield and Newcastle University.
The Open University used the project to ‘understand the student experience in a changing world’ by rationalising and using quantitative and qualitative information from students about their experiences of modules and qualifications.
While at Huddersfield, EQUIP aided a focus on developing virtual learning environments (VLEs) to enhance the student learning experience.
Newcastle University’s participation in the change programme involved using evidence from UK and international students about their experiences to promote learning experiences abroad for UK students and to engage more effectively with incoming students.
The call for applications opens today (8 May 2013) and closes on 28 June 2013. The year-long programme will begin in September 2013.
Change Services
Higher education providers are experiencing unprecedented changes which are challenging traditional approaches to learning and teaching. The HEA offers a range of services designed to help institutions, faculties and/or departments adapt to these changes and thereby enhance the student learning experience.
CALL NOW OPEN
Evidence-informed quality improvement programme (EQUIP)
EQUIP is a one-year programme to help providers develop a widespread evidence-informed approach to quality enhancement. It will help HEIs to interpret and apply the institutional and national evidence to the learning experiences of their students.
The call for expressions of interest to participate is now open. The programme will run from Septembe 2013 to September 2014.
Click here for more information and to submit a proposal.
Current Change Programmes

• Green Academy
• Student Retention and Success
• Recognising Teaching Excellence
• Students as Partners
• Internationalisation

Overview of Services
Our short guide provides an overview of our services for 2012-13, the nature of our support and the benefits of participation. Download the HEA Short Guide to Change Services.
Past Change Programmes
Click here to view all past HEA Change Programmes.

Perspektywy Education Foundation announced the winners of the Perspektywy University Ranking 2013. The winner is Jagiellonian University of Krakow followed, by a narrow margin, by the University of Warsaw. Adam Mickiewicz University of Poznan took the third place. The Kozminski University was first among the Polish private higher education institutions.
In the Perspektywy University Ranking 2013 overall as many as 33 criteria were used, grouped into six categories: prestige - with the weight of 25%, academic strength (potential) – (15%), academic effectiveness (30%), studying environment (10%), internationalization (15%), and innovation (5%). The results of the Perspektywy University Ranking 2013 were announced in Warsaw in the presence of highest officials the Ministery of Science and Higher Education, the President of the Polish Academy of Sciences and members of the academic community.
To assure quality and transparency, the Board that supervised ranking process was composed of former rectors and outstanding public figures. Prof. Michal Kleiber, President of the Polish Academy of Science chaired the Ranking Board (Kapituła in Polish). In fact, Perspektywy ranking consists not of one but several rankings. The ranking of academic institutions (universities) is the main and the most important one but it there are also: ranking of master level private institutions, ranking of bachelor (engineer) level private institutions on, and ranking of state vocational institutions. Altogether 219 Polish higher education institutions were evaluated in the 2013 ranking. In addition to the Perspektywy University Ranking, Ranking by Field of Study was also published covering 40 most popular fields such as humanities, social sciences, nature, science, psychology, law, engineering, technology and IT.
The 14th edition of Perspektywy University Ranking was published together with a leading Polish daily newspaper “Rzeczpospolita”. All results are listed on www.perspektywy.pl (in Polish). More information: Waldemar Siwinski, w.siwinski@perspektywy.pl.

The NTEU Indigenous Policy Committee will conduct the 2013 NTEU National Indigenous Forum on Thursday the 23rd & Friday the 24th May at the Brambuk Cultural Centre, Halls Gap, Victoria. The theme for Forum 2013 is: Bargaining – What do we want?
Indigenous Forum 2013 will have a focus on the current Bargaining Round, in particular, the National Indigenous Claim incorporating numeric targets for maintaining and increasing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employment in the Australian higher education sector.
A number of institutions have already finalised their negotiations for Round 6, while in the main, other institutions have either served their log of claims or are in the throes of negotiations.
While negotiations take place, the looming Federal Election in September presents the possibility for political change; we need to consider what this political change will bring and how it may influence bargaining outcomes?
This year’s Forum will also discuss the 2012 Review of Higher Education Access and Outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People (Behrendt review), in particular how the new membership of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Higher Education Advisory Council (formerly IHEAC) will seek to implement the 35 Review recommendations.
Indigenous Forum 2013 offers delegates the opportunity to provide input into the future development of NTEU Indigenous higher education policy and strategies, relating to Indigenous employment, student income support, research, teaching and social justice issues.
Registration — All those attending Indigenous Forum 2013 must submit a Registration form to the National Office by COB 1st May 2013.  Due to the need to coordinate bus travel to and from the airport it is important to get your registrations in by the due date.

Two Agencies admitted to Register at Committee meeting in Berlin
At its meeting in Berlin on 2/3 May 2013, the Register Committee renewed the registration of the National Agency for Quality Assessment and Accreditation of Spain (ANECA) and admitted the European Council on Chiropractic Education (ECCE) to the Register. Based on external reviews of the two agencies the Register Committee concluded that they operate in substantial compliance with the European Standards and Guidelines (ESG).
Having satisfied the requirements of the EQAR Merger Policy, the Flemish Council of Universities and University Colleges' Quality Assurance Unit (VLUHR QAU), established as a result of a merger between the two quality assurance agencies VLIR and VLHORA (both admitted to the Register in 2009), was granted provisional registration. During the two-year period VLUHR QAU will have to undergo an external review against the ESG.
Register of quality assurance agencies
AAC-DEVA - Andalusian Agency of Knowledge, Department of Evaluation and Accreditation, Spain.
ACQUIN - Accreditation, Certification and Quality Assurance Institute, Germany.
ACSUCYL - Quality Assurance Agency for the University System of Castilla y León, Spain.
ACSUG - Agency for Quality Assurance in the Galician University System, Spain.
AEQES - Agence pour l'Evaluation de la Qualité de l'Enseignement Supérieur, Belgium.
AERES - Evaluation Agency for Research and Higher Education, France.
AHPGS – Accreditation Agency in Health and Social Sciences, Germany.
ANECA - National Agency for the Quality Assessment and Accreditation of Spain, Spain.
AQAS - Agency for Quality Assurance through Accreditation of Study Programmes, Germany.
AQU - Catalan University Quality Assurance Agency, Spain.
ARACIS – Romanian Agency for Quality Assurance in Higher Education, Romania.
ASHE - Agency for Science and Higher Education, Croatia.
ASIIN e.V., Germany.
CTI - Engineering Degree Commission, France.
ECCE - European Council on Chiropractic Education, Germany.
EVA - Danish Evaluation Institute, Denmark.
evalag - Evaluation Agency Baden-Württemberg, Germany.
FIBAA - Foundation for International Business Administration Accreditation, Germany.
FINHEEC - Finnish Higher Education Evaluation Council, Finland.
IEP - Institutional Evaluation Programme, Switzerland.
NEAA - National Evalution and Accreditation Agency, Bulgaria.
NVAO - Accreditation Organisation of the Netherlands and Flanders, Netherlands.
OAQ - Swiss Center of Accreditation and Quality Assurance in Higher Education, Switzerland.
PKA - Polish Accreditation Committee, Poland.
QANU - Quality Assurance Netherlands Universities, Netherlands.
SKVC - Centre for Quality Assessment in Higher Education, Lithuania.
The Accreditation Institution, Denmark.
VLUHR QAU - Quality Assurance Unit of the Flemish Council of Universities and University Colleges, Belgium.
ZEvA - Central Evaluation and Accreditation Agency, Germany.

IAU Horizons, the Association's news and information magazine is addressed primarily to IAU Member Institutions and Organizations, but is also sent to a selected audience beyond the IAU Membership such as Ministries of Higher Education, international organizations, national and regional associations of universities and others.
It Takes Two to Tango: Higher Education Institutions and the Employers (IAU Horizons Vol. 18, no.3 & Vol.19, no.1)
By Pam Fredman, IAU Vice-President and Rector University of Gothenburg, Sweden. Tomorrow’s society will be formed by the on-going globalization. There are many definitions of the word globalization, but the one given by Dr Nayef R.F. Al Rodhan and Gérard Stoudman (19 June 2006), “Globalization is a process that encompasses the cause, course, and consequences of translational and transcultural integration of human and non-human activities”, is well in line with the topic of the 14th IAU General Conference, in San Juan, Puerto Rico in 2012, “Higher Education and the Global Agenda: Alternative Paths to the Future”. Globalization will continue with its positive and negative consequences and the future challenges have to be met with the perspective of a sustainable development of society, encompassing environmental, economic, cultural and social aspects.
It is generally held that the development of tomorrow’s society will require large numbers of knowledgeable and engaged individuals. This need is reflected in an increase of HEIs around the world and national goals concerning HE. The attitude to and the knowledge and recognition of sustainable development perspectives carried by these students will have a great impact on our future society. That HEIs have a crucial role and responsibility in the development of a sustainable society is obvious. New knowledge has to be created and developed through disciplinary depth and interdisciplinary challenges. Global challenges like environmental destruction, economic crises, social exclusion, ageing populations and transmission of diseases all have to be approached from a range of different perspectives. This demands multidisciplinary knowledge and a holistic view that must be transferred to all parts of society through our students, the future workforce and our future leaders... Read more in IAU Horizons Vol. 18, no.3 & Vol.19, no.1.

IAU Horizons, the Association's news and information magazine is addressed primarily to IAU Member Institutions and Organizations, but is also sent to a selected audience beyond the IAU Membership such as Ministries of Higher Education, international organizations, national and regional associations of universities and others.
Tomorrow’s Universities and the Seven Pillars of the Knowledge Revolution (IAU Horizons Vol. 18, no.3 & Vol.19, no.1)
By Ismail Serageldin, Director, Library of Alexandria, Egypt. The Seven Pillars of the New Knowledge Revolution The ICT revolution and the globalization we are witnessing are also promoting what I call the “New Knowledge Revolution”. This knowledge revolution can be characterised by seven key “pillars”. These are:
Parsing, Life & Organization – Since the beginning of time, whether we were writing on scrolls or codexes, the accumulation of knowledge was based on parsed structures, with units put next to each other like bricks in a wall of an emerging structure. In addition each piece was “dead”, or fixed, once published. The Internet changed all that. The web page became the unit of parsing, and it is constantly updated. Today, we witness fluid merging of text and image, both still and video, and 3D virtual reality and augmented reality. The structure, organization and presentation of knowledge will become one large interconnected vibrant global living tissue of concepts, ideas and facts that is growing exponentially and which will require new modes of thinking to interact with it.
Image & Text – Throughout history, we transmitted information mostly as text. The human brain can process visual information with incredible rapidity, but images were difficult to produce and to reproduce. Today everybody can record images and we can expect far larger reliance on image – in addition to text – in the future.
Humans & Machines – With the exception of pure mathematics and some aspects of philosophy, it will no longer be possible for any human being to search for, find and retrieve, and then manipulate knowledge in any field, without the intermediation of machines.
Complexity and Chaos – The world we live in is remarkably complex. Ecosystems, biological functions and the socioeconomic transactions of a globalizing world are all exceedingly intricate and chaotic. Many of our models, based on the simple mathematics and analogies drawn from physics, are proving inadequate.
Computation & Research – Computing and information science will no longer be only for assisting in crunching large numbers. Today, Computational Science Concepts, tools and theorems will weave into the very fabric of science and scientific practice.
Convergence & Transformation – In simplest terms, once upon a time we had chemistry and biology as distinct and separate enterprises, now we also have biochemistry. Such moments of convergence, generating new sciences and insights, are extremely productive in the development of our knowledge and our technologies.
Pluri-Disciplinarity & Policy – The old academic “silos” of disciplines when functioning alone are counterproductive. Many of our real life problems, such as poverty, gender or the environment, are all multi-dimensional and complex and require a special way of organizing all the various disciplinary inputs. We need the wisdom of the humanities in addition to the knowledge of the natural sciences... Read more in IAU Horizons Vol. 18, no.3 & Vol.19, no.1.

IAU Horizons, the Association's news and information magazine is addressed primarily to IAU Member Institutions and Organizations, but is also sent to a selected audience beyond the IAU Membership such as Ministries of Higher Education, international organizations, national and regional associations of universities and others.
Higher Education and Globalisation: an Indissolubly Technical and Ethical Partnership (IAU Horizons Vol. 18, no.3 & Vol.19, no.1)
By Monique Castillo, Professor of Philosophy, Université Paris-Est Créteil, France.
First Vision of Globalisation: Multipolarity as a Division of the World
Difference encourages competition between nations and continents In a world where everyone is looking out for him or herself, students are striving for a dominant place amongst the new elites of globalization, which for them represents a mass of opportunities there for the taking; they are devoting all their energy to contributing to the new achievements of the “information age”.
Consequences for universities: No public world culture; Manipulative elites; Achievement vs. ethics.
In an international context dominated by uncertainty, we have to accept change in order to turn it into opportunity; our utmost duty is to ensure that, as humans, we mobilise ourselves to keep up with change. The type of person who establishes him or herself as an elite inspires neither confidence nor envy, especially a ‘fighter’, unafraid of compromise, with a mercenary view of the knowledge economy.
Second Vision of Globalisation: Irreversible Technological Homogenisation
The race for diplomas and patents anticipates and precipitates the advent of a mangerialised world Globalisation is seen as inevitable and irreversible cultural homogenization. Basic knowledge which lets students be part of this globalization is the sort of knowledge which needs no culture; knowledge is passed on thanks to its cultural anonymity. An exclusively utilitarian concept of knowledge leads to a generalised deculturalisation of the elite, with excellence being limited to the possession of what is known as “cognitive capitalism”, which integrates knowledge into the productive dynamic.
Consequences for universities: A public world culture founded on a general deculturalisation; Citizens of the world who have neither faith nor rules; Knowledge as cognitive technology.
Expert debates just bring together decultured individuals, with globalisation acting as a dispossessor of universal culture. The disengagement between professional success and culture favours inculture: the winners of this deculturalisation become indifferent world citizens (L’économie mondialisée, Reich).
Third vision of globalisation: the need for common cultural good
The promotion of a pluralist public culture becomes a universal goal At a time when fierce competition is dividing people, we need a public culture capable of favouring the creativity of each one of us within a climate of universal peace. Pluralism as a common good can become a universal goal, provided that we fight against both cultural homogenization and cultural tribalism (favouring one’s own culture, disdaining the other’s)... Read more in IAU Horizons Vol. 18, no.3 & Vol.19, no.1.

IAU Horizons, the Association's news and information magazine is addressed primarily to IAU Member Institutions and Organizations, but is also sent to a selected audience beyond the IAU Membership such as Ministries of Higher Education, international organizations, national and regional associations of universities and others.
Internationalisation of higher education (IAU Horizons Volume 18, No.2)
By Gilles Breton, Graduate School of International and Public Affairs, University of Ottawa, Canada. A topic becomes the object of deep debate because it cristallises a call for references, a demand for renewed understanding of a situation that seems more and more complex, or the search for new forms of action. This is, to my mind, the impact and interest of the document Affirming Academic Values in Internationalization of Higher Education: A Call for Action launched by IAU a few weeks ago.
At the time when I received the IAU text, I was deep in the reading of the remarkable book by Marie Scot on La London School of Economic and political science 1895-2010 Internationalisation universitaire et circulation des savoirs which seems to me a major contribution to the discussion on the internationalisation of our universities. Obviously, the London School of Economic and political science (LSE) is not a representative example, since it is a university that is solely specialised in social sciences and humanities and one of the most international universities in the world. If in 1925, it already had 20% of foreign students, in 2010 they represented 68% of its 10 000 students and 57% of its teachers were foreign. But its history and present position on the world university chessboard make LSE a privileged observatory to give true meaning to the internationalisation of higher education and to understand the impact and limits of the international strategies of an institution on its academic life.
The contribution of Marie Scot’s book seems twofold to me. On the one hand, the analysis over a long period, in this case 1895-2010, enables us to understand the changes in internationalisation and its various contributions to the life of an institution. If the first period of internationalisation that goes from 1920 to 1944 is a time of refoundation of academic life and international expertise in the fields of international relations, colonial studies and economics, it is also a time when international recruitment becomes a prominent line of action and the implementation of embryonic networks of alumni (network of former students). The second period, which covers the years 1945-1974, is that of the years of the Cold War and the special relations between the British Empire and the United States. At the academic level, it witnesses the creation at LSE of new fields of study such as development studies, econometrics, demography and, of course the ‘Area Studies’. The international strategies focus on greater international student and teacher mobility, the redefinition of courses of study to be offered to foreign students according to their cycle of studies, the export to the Third World of the British university model and last the multiplication of networks of former students. Last a period of “world- class university in academic globalisation 1975-2010”, which sees the LSE faced with the crisis in university funding that affects both the education programmes – sale of educational products and factory to produce masters – and research activities which are becoming more and more activities of extrauniversity and international expertise. If the two periods preceding the networks of former students developed in the perspective of their contribution to the funding of the institution, the current period enriches this ‘alumni’ stake by presenting it as an indicator of the soft power of LSE on the international scene.
If the embedding of internationalisation in an historical perspective is welcome, the perspective of the author of the circulation of knowledge seems to me to enrich the discussion and give depth to the concept of internationalisation because the circulation of knowledge does not limit itself to the usual analysis of academic mobility by policymakers, students, professors and ‘alumni’, but also includes the study of the impact of internationalisation on academic and disciplinary mobility, the recomposition not only of training programmes to which an international element would be added, but also of the disciplines themselves and the research activities. In this book, we find a proposal to read internationalisation as something that, by including the circulation of scientific paradigms, opens on to promising axes of research and action and offers a new light on the proposition that internationalisation is an institutional project that is at the heart and not at the periphery of the life of a university. This book should be read by both researchers and the actors of internationalisation. Read more in IAU Horizons Volume 18, No.2.