UCC’s Benchmark Universities Sample Clauses

UCC’s Benchmark Universities. Background: UCC appointed a Director of Strategic Planning & Institutional Research in December 2006. One of the key initial tasks for the appointee was to identify and agree an appropriate set of benchmark universities. This task was initiated on 27 February 2007 with the stated objectives of:  identifying comparator institutions for UCC  agreeing on 9 institutions for UCC to use for future benchmarking and comparison of performance The following needs were to be met:  To enable benchmarking of performance to be undertaken by providing external comparators to UCC  To provide a mechanism for monitoring trends to ensure planning in UCC is consistent with best international practice  To facilitate UCC in leveraging international best practice to improve its KPIs  To provide UCC with a ‘target’ group of institutions with which it can further strengthen and develop relationships for mutual benefit Selection Criteria: At that time, the criteria for selecting the benchmark universities was agreed in consultation with the President, Heads of College, Deans and Vice Presidents of the University. It was agreed that the selected benchmark universities should:  Have a similar disciplinary profile to UCC  Have broadly comparative student numbers, staff numbers and income level  Be research driven  Include universities in a regional and second city locations  Include universities that would ‘stretch’ UCC to improve its performance  Have good availability of data  Be ranked by THES and Shanghai Xxxx Xxxx  Represent a spread of geographies globally Process: The selection process included the following steps:  Referrals of comparator institutions were sought from staff with experience of international higher education and from the President, Heads of College, Deans and Vice Presidents  An initial list of 53 referred institutions was identified and these were further discussed through a consultation process with UCC staff with international university experience  Data was gathered on the 53 institutions  The selection criteria was applied to identify 9 recommended benchmark universities  The recommended universities were proposed to the University Management Group for approval Outcome: UCC’s benchmark universities were agreed on 27 April 2007. The benchmark universities are as follows: • NUIG • UCD • TCD • QUB • University of Southampton • University of Edinburgh • Aarhus University • Leiden University • Otago University UCC has continued to use its benc...
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to UCC’s Benchmark Universities

  • Performance Indicators The HSP’s delivery of the Services will be measured by the following Indicators, Targets and where applicable Performance Standards. In the following table: n/a meanç ‘not-appIicabIe’, that there iç no defined Performance Standard for the indicator for the applicable year. tbd means a Target, and a Performance Standard, if applicable, will be determined during the applicable year. INDICATOR CATEGORY INDICATOR P = Performance Indicator E = Explanatory Indicator M = Monitoring Indicator 2019/20 PERFORMANCE TARGET STANDARD Organizational Health and Financial Indicators Debt Service Coverage Ratio (P) 1 c1 Total Margin (P) 0 cO Coordination and Access Indicators Percent Resident Days – Long Stay (E) n/a n/a Wait Time from LHIN Determination of Eligibility to LTC Home Response (M) n/a n/a Long-Term Care Home Refusal Rate (E) n/a n/a SCHEDULE D — PERFORMANCE 2/3 INDICATOR CATEGORY Quality and Resident Safety Indicators INDICATOR P = Performance Indicator E = Explanatory Indicator M = Monitoring Indicator Percentage of Residents Who Fell in the Last 30 days (M) 2019/20 PERFORMANCE TARGET STANDARD n/a n/a Percentage of Residents Whose Pressure Ulcer Worsened (M) n/a n/a Percentage of Residents on Antipsychotics Without a Diagnosis of Psychosis (M) n/a n/a Percentage of Residents in Daily Physical Restraints (M) n/a n/a SCHEDULE D — PERFORMANCE 2.0 LHIN-Specific Performance Obligations 3/3

  • MINISTRY/SCHOOL BOARD INITIATIVES ETFO will be an active participant in the consultation process to develop a Ministry of Education PPM regarding Ministry/School Board Initiatives.

  • Professional Development Funds 23.1.1 Two Professional Development Funds, a Professional Development Support Fund and an Education Leave Fund, shall be established to support professional development activities as defined in 23.2. On April 1st of each year, the College will allocate an amount equal to no less than 0.9% of total faculty salary (exclusive of severance payments) to the Professional Development Support Fund, and an amount equal to no less than 0.6% of total faculty salary to the Educational Leave Fund. Any unused balances in these funds shall carry over to the next budget year.

  • Professional Development Fund A budget item equal to one-half (½) of one (1) percent of employees' salaries shall be set aside annually to be used to:

  • Performance indicators and targets The purpose of the innovation performance indicators and targets is to assist the University and the Commonwealth in monitoring the University's progress against the Commonwealth's objectives and the University's strategies for innovation. The University will report principal performance information and aim to meet the innovation performance indicators and targets set out in the following tables.

  • Attainment on Performance Indicators The District will be responsible for overseeing the academic programs offered in its schools and ensuring that those programs meet or exceed state and local expectations for levels of attainment on the statewide performance indicators, as specified in 1 CCR 301-1.

  • Educational Programs 412. Subject to the approval of the appointing officer, Personal Property Auditors and other represented employees shall be on paid status when attending educational programs required to maintain a job-related state license.

  • Benchmarks 2.1 Benchmarks set forth the overall scope and level of responsibility and the typical duties by which jobs or positions are distinguished and classified under the Classification System.

  • University strategies Our aspirations and key priorities for enhancing teaching and learning quality We aspire to produce flexible and creative thinkers – leaders for Australia and the wider world. To do this, we need to provide an enriching university experience that equips our graduates with enquiring minds and essential life skills in critical thinking and communication. Our students must have excellent opportunities to participate in co-curricular activities if they wish to do so, and have access to high quality infrastructure and support services. To maintain and build on our success in these areas, our short- to medium-term priorities will focus on three complementary areas. Our plans Renewing our curriculum and learning environments We will continue to implement our curriculum renewal strategy by pursuing a coordinated University-wide process of reform of our courses. At the heart of this strategy lies a commitment to providing an 'engaged enquiry' learning experience for our students, in order to strengthen the development of our graduate attributes. Such learning experiences reflect the University’s reputation for both research and community engagement. They are consistent with our students' expectations as learners and our staff as teachers. 'Engaged enquiry’ provides the vehicle by which we will focus on further enhancing the research and inquiry learning outcomes that are central to our graduate attributes. We are currently mapping students’ reports of research- enriched learning experiences, and working with our Engaged Enquiry Scholars networks to identify and disseminate examples of approaches that xxxxxx effectively the development of research skills by our undergraduate students. The second aspect of our ‘engaged enquiry' curriculum strategy is the embedding of community- engaged learning, including work-integrated learning (WIL), in our curricula. This commitment will involve professional disciplines in particular, in further strengthening the engagement of employers in our teaching and curriculum development, and in further developing our pedagogical expertise in this area to inform curriculum renewal. One example of how we are pursuing this agenda is seen in the establishment of a new WIL research group in the Faculty of Health Sciences. Our approach to curriculum renewal will continue to be both holistic and sustainable. We will use University-wide agreed principles to link our faculties’ curriculum renewal work explicitly to the need for responsiveness to external drivers. These include employer needs, accreditation and regulatory accountabilities, changes in student and employment market needs, and the renewal of our physical and virtual teaching infrastructure outlined in Section 4.4.2 (Teaching and Learning Infrastructure) of this compact. Building on the findings of recent Office for Learning and Teaching (OLT) projects we will seek, through implementation of our new assessment policy, to develop our assessment practices to provide better direct evidence of student achievement of our graduate attributes. Our unit and course evaluation processes will provide clear accountability mechanisms to assist in monitoring students’ development of graduate attributes, including generic skills. During the next phase of reform we will implement a systematic process of faculty-led curriculum reviews, and support faculties to refine their understanding of how research-enriched and community-engaged pedagogies can deliver an engaged enquiry experience for students in different disciplines. This pedagogical work will build on the substantial body of excellent practice already in place in many parts of the University. It will also respond to the outcomes of relevant OLT projects, and will be supported by the development of new institutional datasets on our students’ experiences of the development of graduate attributes through engaged enquiry. There will also be new support for enhanced curriculum governance and review through our central teaching and curriculum committees. We will initiate new strategic curriculum projects and establish additional Teaching Scholars Networks to develop agreed curriculum benchmark standards and xxxxxx curriculum and teaching expertise across the faculties. Through collaboration between disciplines and faculties, our curriculum renewal projects will generate new resources and benchmark standards for use in future curriculum reviews and professional development for our staff. Enhancing teaching quality, support and recognition Alongside and supporting the process of curriculum reform is our work on enhancing and further valuing the high quality of teaching and curriculum across the institution. Following consistent improvements over the past five years in our performance against measures of student experience of their courses (Student Course Experience Questionnaires) we recently developed and introduced the first stage of a new University-wide strategy to enhance the quality of our students' experiences in all units of study. Through compacts on faculty teaching standards, we will continue to use a University-agreed teaching standards framework to help faculties address teaching quality issues. This process will be supported by new institutional data reporting processes. Each year, faculties will be required to negotiate improvement targets aligned to University-agreed standards and their own strategic priorities, and will be supported to identify and address quality issues. Longer term, we will embed these compacts in an annual cycle of planning, reporting and monitoring. We will extend the scope of our faculty teaching compacts to draw on a broader range of data than that relating to units of study, and will include additional institutional standards in relation to other institutional teaching priorities, such as engaged enquiry. During the life of our 2014-16 compact, we will extend this support to individual teachers through the rollout of the new Academic Planning and Development process for teaching, as well as through research and ongoing enhancements to our range of professional development opportunities for University teachers and research higher degree supervisors. This will complement the University’s enhancement and support for the career opportunities for teachers through the University’s new academic promotion process. It will also allow us to develop further the University and faculty teaching award and grants schemes. We will build institutional recognition for our talented teachers by engaging them in our curriculum renewal process, connecting them with each other through the establishment of additional Teaching Scholars Networks and by providing opportunities for their further professional development. Recognition of the importance of excellence in teaching will also be supported by the annual Sydney Teaching Colloquium, a successful initiative launched in 2011, which brings together the university teaching community to celebrate their achievements, critically debate key educational initiatives and share their expertise and exemplary practice. Improving the student experience Our Teaching and Learning strategies recognise that student wellbeing and the general quality of their experience while at university must underpin our efforts to improve teaching and learning. During the timeframe of our 2014-16 compact, we will deliver a greater coherence across all aspects of the student experience. This will include improvements in priority areas such as: enhancing the student enrolment and ongoing administration process by completing the Sydney Student project providing specialist services and resources to support the emotional and mental wellbeing of students, such as personal counselling and psychological resilience resources establishing early identification systems for students, particularly those from underrepresented groups and international students, who may be struggling in the early phase of their studies developing and expanding existing formal and informal support networks through consistent mentor training and staff development programs collaborating with our student representative organisations, to ensure that income from the Student Services and Amenities Fee (SSAF) is used effectively to enhance access to amenities such as sports and cultural activities, the social dimensions of clubs and societies, and also to improve the quality and affordability of food and beverages available on campus endeavouring to maintain the high ratings we have received from the National Union of Students for our approach to involving students in decisions about the allocation of SSAF funds expanding affordable accommodation options around our campuses. Note: All calendar year references below relate to projects and awards in that calendar year. Principal Performance Indicators Baseline 2012 Progressive Target 2013 Progressive Target 2014 Progressive Target 2015 Target 2016

  • Develop programs 1) The Employer will develop and implement health promotion and health education programs, subject to the availability of resources. Each Appointing Authority will develop a health promotion and health education program consistent with the Minnesota Management & Budget policy. Upon request of any exclusive representative in an agency, the Appointing Authority shall jointly meet and confer with the exclusive representative(s) and may include other interested exclusive representatives. Agenda items shall include but are not limited to smoking cessation, weight loss, stress management, health education/self-care, and education on related benefits provided through the health plan administrators serving state employees.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.