![]() |
Joint
European Project |
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||
Minutes of the MeetingsContents:
Minutes of
the partnership conference on
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| № | Academic Subjects and Scientific Activities | Credit Points | Student's academic load, hours | Independant Training |
|||||||
| 1st Year |
2nd Year |
Total | Total | Lecture | Practica 1 lessons |
Lab Exercises |
Seminars | Course Papers |
|||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 1.00 | General-methodological subjects | 65 | 22 | 87 | 558 | 254 | 152 | 26 | 126 | 285 | |
| 1.01 | Philosophical problems of subjects | 10 | 10 | 60 | 30 | 30 | 30 | ||||
| 1.02 | Methodology of scientific creation | 10 | 10 | 60 | 26 | 12 | 22 | 30 | |||
| 1.03 | Practical Foreign language | 9 | 3 | 12 | 80 | 20 | 60 | 40 | |||
| 1.04 | Information technology | 12 | 12 | 80 | 44 | 10 | 26 | 40 | |||
| 1.05 | Management and economy of education | 6 | 6 | 40 | 20 | 10 | 10 | 20 | |||
| 1.06 | Methodology of training special subjects | 6 | 6 | 40 | 14 | 10 | 16 | 20 | |||
| 1.07 | National Independence idea: main concept and principles | 10 | 10 | 60 | 30 | 30 | 36 | ||||
| 1.08 | Pedagogic technology and pedagogic skills | 6 | 6 | 40 | 20 | 10 | 10 | 20 | |||
| 1.09 | Constitution of the Republic of Uzbekistan | 3 | 3 | 18 | 10 | 8 | 9 | ||||
| 1.10 | Macroeconomics-2 | 4 | 4 | 20 | 10 | 10 | 10 | ||||
| 1.11 | Microeconomics-2 | 4 | 4 | 20 | 10 | 10 | 10 | ||||
| 1.12 | Theory and practice of modern market economy | 4 | 4 | 20 | 10 | 10 | 10 | ||||
| 1.13 | Economic psychology | 4 | 4 | 20 | 10 | 10 | 10 | ||||
| 2.00 | Special subjects | 45 | 21 | 66 | 738 | 363 | |||||
| 2.01 | Budget system of the Republic of Uzbekistan | 10 | 6 | 16 | 100 | 40 | 60 | C.P | 50 | ||
| 2.02 | Public Finance management | 23 | 23 | 140 | 60 | 80 | C.P | 70 | |||
| 2.03 | Investment projects financing | 15 | 15 | 90 | 36 | 54 | 50 | ||||
| 2.04 | Public tax | 12 | 12 | 80 | 36 | 44 | 40 | ||||
| 2.05 | Optional subjects | 24 | 32 | 56 | 328 | 182 | 146 | 153 | |||
| 2.05.1 | Financial mathematics | 4 | 4 | 20 | 10 | 10 | 10 | ||||
| 2.05.2 | Evaluation and restructuring of financial institutes | 4 | 4 | 20 | 10 | 10 | 13 | ||||
| 2.05.3 | Financial markets and instruments | 9 | 9 | 54 | 36 | 18 | 20 | ||||
| 2.05.4 | Corporate Finance | 10 | 10 | 60 | 30 | 30 | 30 | ||||
| 2.05.5 | Macroeconomic dynamics | 9 | 9 | 54 | 36 | 18 | 20 | ||||
| 2.05.6 | Capital market in transition economy | 10 | 10 | 60 | 30 | 30 | 30 | ||||
| 2.05.7 | Introduction to dynamic general equilibrium economics | 10 | 10 | 60 | 30 | 30 | 30 | ||||
| Master's thesis | 25 | 25 | |||||||||
| Total | 134 | 100 | 234 | 1296 | 648 | ||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 3.00 | Scientific activity | 1512 | 756 | ||||||||
| 3.01 | Scientific-pedagogic activity | 360 | 180 | ||||||||
| 3.02 | Scientific-research activity | 826 | 416 | ||||||||
| 3.03 | Preparation of MasterŐs thesis | 326 | 160 | ||||||||
| 2808 | 1404 | ||||||||||
| № | Academic Subjects and Scientific Activities | Credit Points | Student's academic load, hours | Independant Training |
|||||||
| 1st Year |
2nd Year |
Total | Total | Lecture | Practica 1 lessons |
Lab Exercises |
Seminars | Course Papers |
|||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 1.00 | General-methodological subjects | 65 | 22 | 87 | 558 | 254 | 152 | 26 | 126 | 285 | |
| 1.01 | Philosophical problems of subjects | 10 | 10 | 60 | 30 | 30 | 30 | ||||
| 1.02 | Methodology of scientific creation | 10 | 10 | 60 | 26 | 12 | 22 | 30 | |||
| 1.03 | Practical Foreign language | 9 | 3 | 12 | 80 | 20 | 60 | 40 | |||
| 1.04 | Information technology | 12 | 12 | 80 | 44 | 10 | 26 | 40 | |||
| 1.05 | Management and economics of education | 6 | 6 | 40 | 20 | 10 | 10 | 20 | |||
| 1.06 | Methodology of training in special subjects | 6 | 6 | 40 | 14 | 10 | 16 | 20 | |||
| 1.07 | National Independence idea: main concept and principles | 10 | 10 | 60 | 30 | 30 | 36 | ||||
| 1.08 | Pedagogic technology and pedagogic skills | 6 | 6 | 40 | 20 | 10 | 10 | 20 | |||
| 1.09 | Constitution of the Republic of Uzbekistan | 3 | 3 | 18 | 10 | 8 | 9 | ||||
| 1.10 | Macroeconomics-2 | 4 | 4 | 20 | 10 | 10 | 10 | ||||
| 1.11 | Microeconomics-2 | 4 | 4 | 20 | 10 | 10 | 10 | ||||
| 1.12 | Theory and practice of modern market economy | 4 | 4 | 20 | 10 | 10 | 10 | ||||
| 1.13 | Economic psychology | 4 | 4 | 20 | 10 | 10 | 10 | ||||
| 2.00 | Special subjects | 36 | 31 | 67 | 738 | 363 | |||||
| 2.01 | Public taxes | 6 | 10 | 16 | 100 | 40 | 60 | C.P | 50 | ||
| 2.02 | Local taxes | 15 | 15 | 90 | 40 | 50 | C.P | 50 | |||
| 2.03 | Budget system of the republic of Uzbekistan | 10 | 6 | 16 | 100 | 40 | 60 | 50 | |||
| 2.04 | Public finance management | 20 | 20 | 120 | 56 | 64 | 60 | ||||
| 2.05 | Optional subjects | 34 | 21 | 55 | 328 | 174 | 154 | 153 | |||
| 2.05.1 | Financial mathematics | 4 | 4 | 20 | 10 | 10 | 10 | ||||
| 2.05.2 | Financial markets and instruments | 10 | 10 | 60 | 30 | 30 | 30 | ||||
| 2.05.3 | Corporate finance | 10 | 10 | 60 | 30 | 30 | 30 | ||||
| 2.05.4 | Risk management | 10 | 10 | 60 | 30 | 30 | 23 | ||||
| 2.05.5 | Taxation of financial institutions | 12 | 12 | 74 | 38 | 36 | 40 | ||||
| 2.05.6 | Tax accounting | 9 | 9 | 54 | 36 | 18 | 20 | ||||
| Master's thesis | 25 | 25 | |||||||||
| Total | 135 | 100 | 235 | 1296 | 648 | ||||||
| 3.00 | Scientific activity | 1512 | 756 | ||||||||
| 3.01 | Scientific-pedagogic activity | 360 | 180 | ||||||||
| 3.02 | Scientific-research activity | 826 | 416 | ||||||||
| 3.03 | Preparation of Master's thesis | 326 | 160 | ||||||||
| 2808 | 1404 | ||||||||||
The following six manuals created with the direct support from our JEP will be used during the first year of the pilot courses:
1. Financial markets and instruments
2. Introduction to dynamic general equilibrium economics
3. Risk management
4. Corporate Finance
5. Public finance management
6. Capital market in transition economy
They should be ready for use by the beginning of the
educational year 2005/2006.
As of 2005/2006 the Institute will be launching pilot education of the PhD students that will be containing many components of the Bologna process and of the Berlin Declaration. The courses will be held both by own teachers as well as by invited professors and will be following the program listed bellow:
| № | Subjects |
Work load (hours) | Credit Hours |
|||
| Total | Auditory classes | |||||
| Lectures | Seminars |
Project work |
||||
| I | Obligatory Subjects | 324 | 216 | 81 | 27 | 52 |
| 1 | Microeconomics | 54 | 36 | 18 | 8 | |
| 2 | Macroeconomics | 54 | 36 | 18 | 8 | |
| 3 | Advanced Econometrics | 54 | 36 | 9 | 9 | 8 |
| 4 | Advanced Macroeconomics I | 54 | 36 | 9 | 9 | 10 |
| 5 | Public Economics I | 54 | 36 | 9 | 9 | 10 |
| 6 | Economics Theory | 54 | 36 | 18 | 8 | |
| II | Facultative Subjects | 108 | 72 | 18 | 18 | 16 |
| 1 | Financial Analysis | 54 | 36 | 9 | 9 | 8 |
| 2 | Monetary Policy | 54 | 36 | 9 | 9 | 8 |
| Total Subjects | 432 | 288 | 99 | 45 | 68 | |
| Final Paper | 22 | |||||
| TOTAL | 90 | |||||
A total of 90 credit points will be required for a PhD
student to graduate from the first stage of the PhD process.
In addition two of the JEP supported manuals, namely Macroeconomics II
and Public Good Economics have been reviewed and the recommendation discussed
with the authors.
For both the Bachelor and the Magisterial Level a total of 65 courses have been installed on the Atutor. Below only the Magisterial Level courses are listed
| Course Name | Year of study |
| 1. State Regulation of the economic activities | M1 |
| 2. Econometrics 1 (микро-, макро-) | M1 |
| 3. Econometrics 2 | М2 |
| 4. Professional Foreign Language | М1,2 |
| 5. КПВ (Globalization Problems) | М1 |
| 6. International Finances | М1 |
| 7. State Finances | М1 |
| 8. Economics of Sect oral Structures | М2 |
| 9. Business Law | М1 |
| 10. Financial Analysis | М2 |
| 11. Auditing and Administrative Control | М2 |
| 12. Strategy of Management | М1 |
| 13. Accounting 2 | М2 |
| 14. Basics of Decision Making | М2 |
| 15. Management of international Businesses | М2 |
| 16. General Economic Equilibrium – Theory and Practice | М2 |
| 17. Experiments and quasy Experiments in sociology | М2 |
| 18. Advanced Macroeconomics | М2 |
KEF-KGU has accumulated significant pedagogical and quality assurance experience by making of extensive of the Atutor Learning Content Management System (LCMS) in its educational process both for Bachelor and Master level.
To allow the other partners to benefit from this experience
it was agreed that Prof. Lalieva would be moderating the Practical Workshop
on the use of Atutor in the educational process at the Partnership Conference
this fall in Tashkent.
Review of and recommendation on the JEP supported manuals written by:
• Prof. Aigul Kalchakeeva: Management of the Exchange Rates
• Dr. Natalia Bragina: Public goods economics
Negotiation with the local companies on the delivery of the required equipments – contacts for both KEF-KGU and BAFE signed.
19th of September
10:00 – 12:20 Plenary Session
Presentations of: The Minister, the Rector, Aziza Abdurakhmanova, EU representative, Project coordinator
12:00 – 14:00 Business Lunch at a nearby Restaurant
14:00 – 16:00 Session on Quality Assurance
Presentations by the participants of the Quality Assurance Seminar in Germany:
• Prof. Mafirat Kasimova – Tashkent State University of Economics - 20 minutes
• Dr. Bakhodir Khakimov - Institute of Economics of the Uzbek Academy of Sciences - 20 minutes
• Prof. Elmira Alimova - Bishkek Academy of Finance and Economics- 20 minutes
• Prof. Chinara Adamkulova Kyrgyz – European Faculty of the Kyrgyz National University- 20 minutes
• Prof. Hans Brinkmann, University of Kassel - 20 minutes
Discussion
16:00 – 16:30 Coffee Break
17:00 – Open-ended
Discussion of the program of the working groups for the next day
19:00 Reception for the JEP participants only
20th of September
9:30 – 12:00 Sessions of the Working Groups
• Econometrics and Macro Economics
• Public Finance
• Financial markets and Risk Assessment
• Equilibrium Modeling
12:00 – 13:30 Lunch
13:00 – 16:00 Practical Workshop on the use of Atutor in the educational process
Moderator: Prof. Lalieva, Kyrgyz National University
16:00 – 16:30 Coffee Break
16:30 - Open-ended
Recommendations and Conclusions
Tashkent State University of Economics: Prof. Bakhodir Khodiev and Prof. Gulnora Karieva
The Institute of Economics, of the Academy of Sciences of Republic of Uzbekistan: Prof. Alisher Rasulev
Kyrgyz – European Faculty of the Kyrgyz State National University named after “G. Balsagin”: Prof. Chinara Adamkulova
Bishkek Academy of Finance and Economics, Kirgizistan: Prof. Abdyrahman Mavlianov
Kassel International Management School (KIMS): Prof. Dr. Nigel Holden and Prof. Dr. Hans Brinckmann
IHS staff members: Prof. Klaus Ritzberger, Dr. Christian Helmenstein, Prof. Wolfgang Polasek and Dr. Todor Balabanov
Invited Speaker: Martina Bergler – Austrian Bureau for EU-Third Countries Collaboration
9:30 – 11:00
Moderators Dr. Christian Helmenstein and Dr. Todor Balabanov: Presentation of the partners and some views on the possible cooperation options: I H S management is strongly supportive to the project and will be seeking additional means for furthering the cooperation.
11:00 – 11:45
Martina Bergler: Bologna Process and the European Credit Transfer System. A copy of the presentation has been kindly provided to the IHS and will be presented at the Conference ”Integration of the higher education of Kirgizistan in the Bologna process: problem of university management”, Bishkek, 9-10 of December, 2003 as a joint presentation of Martina Bergler / Todor Balabanov (for the preliminary conference programme see the Attachment).
11:45 – 12:45
Discussion on the First Outline of a Joint Publication (Book) on the Transformation Process in Central Asia tentatively titled: Central Asian Universities on their way to Europe
The title has been accepted and for the purpose participants of the other Central Asian countries will be invited to the conferences. Beyond the first one (Bishkek, 9-10.12.03, For the programme see Attachment 1) the second Central Asian conference is to be organized in Tashkent (tentatively April 2004) and then the final outline of the book will drafted.
12:45 – 14:00
Lunch Break
14:00 - 15:30
Discussion on the university specific transformation processes in the Central Asian Partner Countries by: Prof. Bakhodir Khodiev, Prof. Alisher Rasulev, Prof. Chinara Adamkulova, and Prof. Abdyrahman Mavlianov.
There are three levels of interaction with the Central Asian Partners. The first level is the Bishkek Academy of Finance and Economics where the Magisterial level programmes are still to be developed and accredited; the second level are the Tashkent State University of Economics and the Kyrgyz – European Faculty of the Kyrgyz State National University – both have long term experience with the Magisterial level programmes. The third level is the Institute of Economics of the Academy of Sciences of Republic of Uzbekistan where they want to integrate the magisterial education into their PhD programme.
15:30 – 16:30
Presentation by Prof. Wolfgang Polasek of the first and second year courses at the I H S. The presentation was accented on the importance of the first year’s courses for our project. On that basis Prof. Abdyrahman Mavlianov decided to send three to four people to the macro and econometrics six-week first year courses with follow up participation in the second year 12 UL advanced courses on the same subject. In this relation Prof. Wolfgang Polasek kindly agreed to pay a visit to Bishkek and personally interview and select the candidates for these courses. During the same period Polasek will make two lectures on I H S courses in Bishkek.
16:30 – 18:00
Prof. Dr. Hans Brinckmann: Presentation on the ways and means for quality improvement of the education process. A proposal has been made to visit each of the four Central Asian partners and to make a SWOT analysis of the educational processes of their universities. As result they will be able to provide purpose oriented advise on the appropriate systems of accreditation, quality assurance and evaluation for each of them. The proposal was received with very high approval rate and we will be planning a programme of visits for the year 2005 and beginning of 2006. (See also Attachment 2)
18:00 – 18:45
Prof. Dr. Nigel Holden: Presentation of the distance learning system used by the Kassel Management School. After some initial troubles the communication has been established and the interactive session started. It has been decided to repeat this kind of session during the conference in Bishkek (9-10.12.03) in order to reach a broader audience,
19:00 Business Dinner at the Chinese Restaurant – Stumpergasse
9:30 – 11:00
Prof. Dr. Nigel Holden. Announced his decision to present an overview of the international experience on the systems of accreditation, quality assurance and evaluation to the Bishkek conference (9-10.12.03). The presentation will be translated into Russian and Nigel will be personally checking the translation quality.
11:00 – 12:00
Prof. Klaus Ritzberger: Study Plan of the Department of Economics and Finance for the winter semester 2004 and beyond.
A very clear presentation of the PIE and the Program of Finance and on the future merger of the Program of the Centre for Central European Financial Market on Finance Economics with the I H S program with an aim to have an increased representation of lectures on corporate finance in the offered courses as well as to double the number of students. The participants learned that before sending trainees to the second year courses they will have to check on the internet the publications of the respective lecturer in order to be better prepared for the courses.
12:00 – 14:20
Discussions of the project implementation modalities: The Central Asian partners with experience with Magisterial programmes will be sending trainees to the second year courses, namely, 7 trainees from the Kyrgyz – European Faculty of the Kyrgyz State National University and up to 21 trainees from the Tashkent State University of Economics. Prof. Abdyrahman Mavlianov decided to send three people to the macro and econometrics six-week first year courses with follow up participation in the second year 12 UL advanced courses on the same subject.
The cluster of trainees for 2004 and their specific areas of interests will be presented during the Bishkek conference. The training period for or the option of sending trainees during the calendar year 2005 will have to be included in the first report to the ITF (1st of December 03). This option will allow for reducing the flow of trainees to the I H S courses to the level of a maximum 4 trainees at once.The proposal of Dr. Christian Helmenstein to invite 4 postgraduate students to I H S for first years course was gladly accepted. We will be looking for an appropriate EU program, i.e., Individual Mobility Grants, to finance the fellowships.
Organizers of the conference:
Administration of the President of the Kyrgyz Republic
Ministry of Education of the Kyrgyz Republic
Representatives of the European Commission in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan
Supported by the State Agency on Science and Intellectual Property under the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic, TEMPUS TACIS, Educational Network “EdNet” (USA), Central Asian Association of universities.
Partners:
Bern University (Switzerland)
Institute for Advanced Studies (Austria)
Kassel International School of Management (Germany)
Kyrgyz National University named after J. Balasagyn
International University of Kyrgyzstan
Bishkek Academy of Finance and Economics
Date and place of the conference:
December 9 -10, 2003
Bishkek, Government House, HYATT hotel
Time-limit:
Reports on plenary sessions – up to 20 minutes;
Reports in the sections/working groups – up to 15 minutes;
break – after two working hours
9.00 – 11.00
Ormonbekov T. O. (head of the Social department of the Administration of the President of the KR), «About implementation of President A. Akaev’s instructions on entering Kyrgyzstan into the international education space»
Boldjurova I. S. (Ministry of Education of the KR), «About prospective of joining Kyrgyzstan the Bologna process»
Allen Waddams (Ambassador of the Representatives of European Commission in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan), «Appeal to the conference’s participants»
Aidaraliev A. A. (Chairman of the Working Group «Bologna process and innovation openness of universities», academician NAS KR) IUK President, «IUK experience of joining Bologna process»
Omorov R. O. Osmonaliev K. O. (State Agency on science and intellectual property under the Government of the KR), «Science as a significant aspect of Bologna process»
J. Knight (Education Network EdNet), «About implementation of American Credit system in the educational process»
11.00 – 11.15
Coffee-break
11.15 – 13.00
Section № 1 - Issues of up-to-date university management and education quality assurance
Moderator: Aidaraliev A. A. (IUK president)
Bergler M./Balabanov T. (Institute for Advanced Studies, Vienna), «Bologna process and ECTS»
Nigel Holden (Kassel International School of Management, Germany) “Developing a quality assurance system for socio-economics teaching in Central Asian universities”
Shapovalova E. B. (KNU), «Role of a university library in the European system»
Kuflei O. V. (KNU), «New Technologies in higher education and electronic teaching materials»
13.00 – 14.00
Lunch
14.00 – 15.00
Section № 2 - «Experience of the credit system implementation in the educational process»
Moderators: Yantsen V. K. (IUK), «Modernization of the educational process management model in IUK (10-years experience of innovation activities)»
Adamkulova Ch. U. (KNU), «Implementation of French educational system in the National University of Kyrgyzstan»
Narkoziev A. K., Dubchenko G. N. (IUK) «Role of an educational department in the educational process monitoring»
Mirkin E. L. (IUK), «Educational standards development (on the materials of «System analysis» ? «Management» specialties)»
Sartov T. E. (KNU), «Technique of creation of informational resources for turning higher education to the credit system»
15.00 – 15.45
Section № 3 - «About transferring of Kyrgyzstan’s universities to the two-level model of higher education: Bachelor – Master»:
Moderators: Mavlyanov A. S. (Rector of Bishkek Academy of Finance and Economics), Smanaliev K. M. (deputy Minister of Education of the KR)
Adieva A. A. (IUK) «Definition of the content of higher education taking into account the Bologna declaration requirements (on the example of «Economics» specialty)»
Bekboeva R. R. (IUK) «Principles of compilation of an up-to-date IUK curriculum and syllabus (on the materials of the IUK magistrates)»
Alimova E. T. (BAFE) «Significance of international educational programs for transferring to the two-level educational model in Kyrgyzstan»
Mambetakunov E. (KNU), «Methodology of education and Bologna process»
Brimkulov U. N., Abakirova G. B. (KNU), «Comparative analysis of European universities’ and KNU “Computer science” curricula»
15.45 – 16.00
Coffee-break
16.00 – 17.00
Section № 4 - «Role of science in the integration of Kyrgyzstan’s universities into the Bologna process»
Moderators: Omorov R. O., Osmonaliev K. O.
Jamankulov J.M., Sharapov V. P. (KNU) ” Social – psychological key points of students work quality improvement”
Akmatov A. (KNU), “Evaluation of the training quality of a high – caliber specialist”.
9.00 – 10.00
Section № 1 - Reports, discussions and drawing up recommendations and suggestions
10.00 – 10.45
Section № 2 - Reports, discussions and drawing up recommendations and suggestions
10.45 – 11. 00
Coffee-break
11.00 – 12.00
Section № 3 - Reports, discussions and drawing up recommendations and suggestions
12.00 – 13.00
Section № 4 - Reports, discussions and drawing up recommendations and suggestions
13.00 – 14.00
Lunch
14.00 – 15.00
Reports of moderators, discussion of results and suggestions. Acceptance of the conference recommendations.
15.00 – 18.00
TEMPUS TACIS
Professor Brinckmann explained the approach to quality assurance (QA), which was fully consistent with the Bologna process. This approach was based on three intersecting elements: accreditation, evaluation and quality management. It was shown that this approach and that QA would bring long-term benefits to the higher education institutions of Central Asia, to professors, to students and to stakeholders. It was not the intention of KIMS to impose their own quality assurance values on those institutions in a heavy-handed way; rather it was up to them to take advantage of this TEMPUS project to introduce QA. KIMS stressed that the success of the project was the recognition in the Central Asian institutions was not just about establishing procedures in a rule-like way, but to create a positive attitude among the professors and senior administrators towards the concept of QA.
But at the outset three important points should be mentioned:
• The introduction of a quality assurance system into a university or institution of higher education will need the support of professors and administrators (many Western universities appoint a full-time professor to be responsible for quality assurance. Because it is a question of introducing changes into traditional practices and procedures it is important that the scheme has the full backing of the university’s president.
• Quality assurance can only be introduced by stages and its acceptance across all faculties and departments of a university may take years. So in the case of Central Asian universities it makes sense to introduce quality assurance on a pilot basis (as is happening in terms of this TEMPUS project).
• The very fact that Central Asian universities are actively sponsoring quality assurance, even on a pilot basis, can send positive signals to potential university partners in other countries.
All higher education systems make great efforts to introduce or to intensify quality assurance in HE. The goals for these endeavors are:
• to promote public confidence, at home and overseas, in higher education and the standards of awards;
• to ensure that there is clarity and transparency about the purposes of programs and the meaning of awards;
• to assist institutions in enhancing the quality of their provision;
• to enable the funding councils to fulfill their statutory responsibilities;
• to generate reliable public information that is helpful to potential students, employers, parents, government, funding councils and the institutions themselves;
• to provide a measure of accountability for the resources provided by the public purse and individuals to fund institutions.
Quality assurance requires basic knowledge about the performance of the higher education institution. So the first essential step is to develop a scheme for performance measurement. The most important functions of performance measurement can be seen in:
• Transparency and accountability
• Learning and improvement
• Appraising and staff development
• Sanctions and control
Quality assurance requires in the second step an agreement of all stakeholders what should be seen as quality in higher education. You will find a set of different perspectives, because quality is a multidimensional concept: What is good for whom under which circumstances. So you can differentiate between approaches like:
• the traditional approach: to convey prestige and positional advantage
• the 'scientific' or expert approach: to conform to standards determined by experts
• the managerial or 'excellence' approach: to measure customer satisfaction in pursuit of market advantage
• the consumerist approach: to empower the customer
• the democratic approach: to achieve common goals in the interests of the community as a whole
The next challenge in quality assurance will be to confront the institution and its members with the goals, the status of performance and the difference between both, that means you need a feed back tool. Such tools are evaluation, scientific studies, traditional audits, monitoring, continuous performance measurement, policy analysis, and benchmarking.
All of these approaches have their specific pros and cons and it is a question of leadership to develop a scheme customised to the needs of the institution or the system. In these approaches to a better knowledge of performance, output and outcomes, the higher education institution is assisted in framing an answer to the crucial question of how and what to measure: What is an indicator for what quality and how can you measure this in a way, which follows the rules of validity and reliability, have relevance and at the same time the power of motivation?
One of the most controversial issues is quantity versus quality: do we have to look for performance indicators for input (e.g. numbers of students, third party funds), throughput (e.g. lessons, drop-outs) and output (e.g. graduates, doctoral studies, publications ...)? If so, we can do this in very different way and with very different implications. Performance measurement is simple, when the organization has products and when it is production oriented, when products are simple and uniform, when production is autonomous, all the causalities are known, and the environment of the institution is stable.
But performance measurement in higher education is highly problematic, because it is value and process oriented, the products are complex and diverse, the production is based on teamwork and is interwoven, the causalities are unknown and the environment of higher education is dynamic. So we have to look for design principles that establish trust, interaction, variety and redundancy.
These are, as we said, the overlapping approaches to quality assurance. We now discuss briefly each in turn.

Accreditation can be seen as a means of state, public authority, or professional recognition of institutions or study programmes. The accreditation process looks for minimal requirements for teaching and research, libraries, social facilities etc and the result is a ‘yes’ or ‘no’, possibly supported with some additional recommendations. Accreditation is a rather new phase in the quality assurance movement in HE. It shifts the ownership and legitimacy away from academic self-control into a more mixed ownership of accreditation. There are two models in discussion respect to quality management und evaluation:
The unbundling model with greater independence of peer review, more guaranties for critical reviews, lower acceptance by academia, risk for escapism and window dressing, complicity of peers in external control, ambivalent mixture of improvement and accountability oriented functions.
The bundling model with internal and external quality assurance as self-regulation, with clear distinction in responsibilities, conducive to institutional quality culture, but critical nature of reviews are endangered and lower credibility of peer review and there are risks for duplication of review processes.
Evaluation is, like accreditation, not a self-contained concept, but has to be adapted to the needs and goals of an institution or system. We can distinguish five definitions of evaluation: Evaluation as professional judgement, as measurement, as assessment of congruence between performance and objectives; evaluation can include with decision orientation or it can be a goal free evaluation.
Evaluation is a process. It is useful to distinguish five progressive stages:
• self-evaluation and self-improvement at institutional or faculty level
• external quality assessment by an independent committee
• meta-evaluation of the process
• public debate about evaluation reports
• consequences for financial allocation or particular study programmes.
The European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) has developed a model which can and should be used by higher education institutions as well. It serves at the same time as a framework for the analysis of the total organization, as an instrument for planning, as a means to ascertain priorities and to make an assessment of different outputs and outcomes. As main principles of quality management the EFQM suggests result orientation, customer focus, leadership and constancy of purpose, management by processes and facts, people development and involvement, continuous learning, innovation and improvement, partnership development, and last but not least public responsibility. It is not an easy task to adapt this highly generalised model to the needs and structures of a higher education institution, but without a continuous and integrative quality management including all aspects of the institution accreditation and evaluation will stay facile to the organisation and its performance.
Evaluation and accreditation in higher education have many problems in common. There are too many standards and criteria in discussion and in use in different countries. Therefore there is a lack of clear hierarchy of standards. Should we prefer absolute standards or relative ones, how do we judge the measurability of standards and criteria and do we stay to hard data or can we also use the “carpenter’s eye”. For many institutions and systems cost and capacity issues are crucial and have yet to be solved. There is also an urgent need for clear decision-making rules and explicit protocols. In introducing evaluation and accreditation we are facing mayor changes in quality assessment, so from traditional instruments controlling the input to outcome related standards, from assessing formal characteristics of programmes to assessing learning outcomes, from supply-oriented to demand-oriented standards and criteria.
Without the institutionalisation of a learning process within the higher education institution, accreditation and evaluation will not have the desired outcome. So we have to adapt these schemes to the new challenges of higher education, like the shift from ‘teaching’ to ‘learning’, from homogeneity of study programmes to differentiation of learning trajectories and flexible credit-accumulation systems with flexible cross-institutional credit-transfer systems. We have to consider new learning modes, like distance learning, lifelong learning tracks and the ‘de-institutionalisation’ of learning.
Since all measuring and benchmarking is past-oriented, there are important risks to keep in mind: the greater the number of standards, the greater the danger of reinforcement of mainstream approaches and imposing uniformity. There are tendencies of rewarding mediocrity instead of excellence. All schemes of evaluation and accreditation show difficulties in assessing innovative developments and the need for more differentiation (institutional and programme).
All systems of higher education have to improve the comparability of higher education programs and to establish the recognition of diplomas and degrees in a wider international context. In all countries new forms of international competition lead to the imperative to deal with new types of higher education providers, including commercial and virtual institutions, some of them acting on a transnational basis. Therefore quality assurance have to encourage international comparability and have to be linked with recognition measures such as credit transfer and accumulation. And generally there has to be a shift in the functions of quality assurance going along with stronger international influences and applications to focus more on transparency and consumer information for students nationally and globally.
We do not minimise the challenges of introducing quality assurance into the universities and institutions of higher education of Central Asia. As it will be clear by now, quality assurance is in many ways a state of mind. In other words, it depends on positive attitudes to its use and potential long-term benefits from as many beneficiaries as possible.