Assessment HEI 2007

700 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
700
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Assessment HEI 2007

  1. 1. ReportAssessment of public universities and their faculties (2007) © ARRA, Bratislava 2007
  2. 2. The authors of this report would like to thank the members of the Board ofAdvisors of ARRA, in particular the chairperson Prof. Štich, Prof. Brunovský, Prof.Kusá, Prof. Bokes and others, and also the members of the Board of Trustees (inparticular the chairperson Ing. J. Kollár) for their comments, discussions, analysesand reviews. The selection of criteria and the set up of the methodology used have beentaken, with certain modifications, from previous ARRA reports1. Discussions with DonThornhill and Lewis Purser, experts that the World Bank arranged for ARRA,contributed significantly to criteria selection and dividing the faculties into six groups.It should be noted, however, that the opinions presented in the following report arenot necessarily identical with those of the persons named here. The report is part of the project financed by European Social Fund. ARRA thanks for the support Partner of ARRA is1 The reports are published at www.arra.sk, Ranking section. ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 2 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  3. 3. 1. Summary ARRA has been in existence for more than three years. In this period, itprepared three reports assessing higher education institutions in Slovakia. Since thebeginning, ARRA has been assigning great importance to international cooperation. Itworked closely with dr. Don Thornhill and dr. Lewis Purser, World Bank experts, inestablishing the methodology. ARRA was at the birth of an informal group of rankingagencies, International Ranking Experts Group (IREG). At the annual meeting of theGroup in Shanghai in October 2007, ARRA became a founding member of aformalised grouping, and ARRA representative, Prof. Ferdinand Devínsky, waselected a member of the Steering Committee of the International Observatory onAcademic Ranking. Until now, ARRA has been obtaining data particularly from the reports of theMinistry of Education of the Slovak Republic. Presently, however, the Ministry doesnot attach so much importance to collecting detailed information on higher educationinstitutions and their faculties. ARRA therefore approached collecting necessary datadirectly from higher education institutions from their annual reports and from theInstitute of Information and Prognoses in Education (ARRA thus continues using datafor its assessments that are publicly accessible and that can be verified by anyone).On the one hand, this situation makes ARRA’s operation more difficult, but, on theother hand, it reflects the fact that higher education institutions are interested intheir own quality and self-evaluation, which is expressed in their annual reports(which are also required by the law). The internal and external evaluations maysynergistically result in quality improvement. However, it should be noted to this encouraging fact that the results ofscientific activity as seen on the basis of VV1 – VV4 indicators show no significantimprovements, but rather to the contrary. Here as well, exceptions can be pointedout that will hopefully become a prevailing rule in the coming years. Examples ofscientifically successful faculties include the relatively new Faculty of Economic andSocial Sciences, Comenius University, and the Faculty of Healthcare and Social Work,Trnava University. The first one is making significant progress in the quantity ofscientific publications in journals listed in Current Contents while the other one, even ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 3 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  4. 4. after reclassification from the SOC group to the MED group, shows excellent results –measured by Slovak standards – and competes with medical faculties with years oftradition. In addition to these two examples, the Faculty of Education, TrnavaUniversity, also deserves attention being the first faculty in the SOC group having apublication with more than 25 citations. The successful operation of TrnavaUniversity in the Slovak situation is illustrated by its Faculty of Law ranking highestamong related faculties of public higher education institutions in the SOC group.Trnava University in general ranks second or third in individual groups. Thesuccessful progress of Trnava University is a proof that even relatively newinstitutions (Trnava University was established in 1992) can reach good results, evenif their taking leading positions undoubtedly requires time. Of course, these are not the only faculties that achieved good results, but theyare among those that improved most remarkably or confirmed their reputation evenamong tougher competitors. The introduction of a new method for the HUM and SOC group faculties’publication activity assessment has not significantly changed their ranking butenabled distinguishing among faculties that had zero in the previous assessment thattook into consideration publications in the WoK only. ARRA is working on anindependent method for the assessment of art faculties and higher educationinstitutions, but this is a very challenging task that will require more time anddiscussions. As mentioned above, the Faculty of Healthcare and Social Work, TrnavaUniversity, compared favourably even in the more challenging conditions of the MEDgroup, outperforming even certain well-established medical faculties. In the presentreport, we moved all medical faculties from the SOC group to the MED group. Thisclassification better reflects their orientation and this was also requested by severalrepresentatives of the academic community. After the discussions, ARRA accepts thatthis solution may be more appropriate. As an experiment, the report includes – with certain limitations – a privatehigher education institution, St. Elizabeth University of Health and Social Sciences,the first private institution in our assessment, which satisfied the condition of at least3 years of existence and which provided data upon request. In several criteria, it ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 4 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  5. 5. reaches relatively good results and is comparable to public higher educationinstitutions in the MED group. ARRA’s ambition is to asses also private highereducation institutions but their position is specific in that they are not obliged topublish information to such an extent as the public institutions. If private highereducation institutions want to be included in the assessment, they have to providemore information about themselves to the public. ARRA is trying to obtaininformation from private higher education institutions also directly. However,information thus collected does not satisfy the nature of public accessibility andverifiability, which ARRA has considered to be the key since the beginning, thereforeprivate institutions cannot be included in a full-fledged assessment on the basis ofsuch information. As of this year, ARRA’s report includes information on the labour marketobtained from the Profesia.sk portal. In the years to come, ARRA plans to expand thescope and also to continue student surveys. This information will enable the public tomake better decisions concerning the choice of higher education institutions. In thisyear’s report, it is included only for illustration and to complement the generalpicture. ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 5 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  6. 6. Assessment of public universities and their faculties 1. Summary .................................................................................................. 3 2. Introduction .............................................................................................. 7 3. Adjustments of the assessment methodology .............................................. 8 4. Main results of the assessment..................................................................16 4.1 Universities and faculties of the AGRO group.......................................16 4.2 Universities and faculties of the HUM group ........................................17 4.3 Universities and faculties of the MED group.........................................18 4.4 Universities and faculties of the NAT group .........................................19 4.5 Universities and faculties of the SOC group .........................................20 4.6 Universities and faculties of the TECH group .......................................21 4.7 Results of other ARRA projects ...........................................................23 5. List of appendices ....................................................................................34 ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 6 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  7. 7. 2. Introduction ARRA is submitting a report to the public assessing higher educationinstitutions and faculties for 2006. The report follows up on the basic philosophy andhistory of higher education institution rankings reflected in ARRA reports on highereducation institutions for 2004 and 2005. Thanks to three continuous years ofassessment, in this report, ARRA identifies trends in higher education in Slovakia. In the future, ARRA intends to include also private higher educationinstitutions in Slovakia. With respect to the fact that the availability of data forprivate higher education institutions is lower than that for public ones, this is aconsiderably more difficult task. In this report, ARRA provides an assessment of St.Elizabeth University of Health and Social Sciences. As this is the only privateinstitution in the assessment, we have not included it in common graphs and tablesbut rather dealt with it separately, of course, in the context of higher educationinstitutions included in the MED group. Since the very formation of ARRA, there were discussions about theassessment of faculties in the HUM and SOC groups. Many scientists in humanitiesand social sciences were pointing out that they were discriminated against in theirfaculties’ quality assessment, as information on publications was accepted exclusivelyfrom WoK. This is one of the reasons why ARRA decided to take into account otherpublications in these two groups. This step enabled differentiation among individualHUM and SOC faculties in the VV1 to VV4 criteria. Year after year the ARRA report is more extensive, therefore it is presented ina changed structure. We hope that it will thus become clearer and thereby moreuseful for its readers. ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 7 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  8. 8. 3. Adjustments of the assessment methodology The procedure that ARRA used in assessing Slovak universities in 2007 issimilar to that used in 2006. Modifications to the assessment methodology used in2007 are listed in the following paragraphs: a) In addition to publications included in the WoK database, ARRA took account of publications in journals and books not included in this database for faculties from the HUM and SOC groups. b) Healthcare faculties, in accordance with the Frascati Manual and suggestions from the academic community, were included in the MED group (previously included in the SOC group; see below for a more detailed explanation). c) Criterion SV5, the average age of active professors, was dropped. The Ministry of Education of the Slovak Republic ceased collecting this data and it is not publicly accessible from other sources (for example, from annual reports). This report includes an assessment of private St. Elizabeth University of Healthand Social Sciences. The nature of data that this institution provided to ARRA uponrequest does not enable the same type of assessment as for public higher educationinstitutions. ARRA considers crucial that the data it works with come from publiclyaccessible and verifiable sources. The institution does not satisfy this condition orsatisfies it only to a limited extent. This is why it is compared with public highereducation institutions only in the text of the report; it is not included in the generalranking of institutions or faculties. Similarly as in the previous assessments, the higher education institutionassessment procedure consists in the following steps in this report:  the selection of indicators for the quality of education and research in individual universities and the assignment of a certain number of points to each faculty for the performance in the particular indicator (indicators are ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 8 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  9. 9. arranged into groups and each group of indicators gained a certain number of points),2  the division of faculties into six groups according to the so-called Frascati Manual in order to compare only faculties that have the same orientation and similar working conditions,  assigning point scores to faculties (the ranking of faculties in individual groups according to the Frascati Manual is based on average points score in individual groups of indicators),  calculating point scores for the higher education institutions in individual Frascati groups (the ranking of the institution in the given group is given by the average assessment of all its faculties included in that group). The most recent version of the Frascati Manual of 20023 divides subjects ofhigher education research and studies into 6 groups: a) natural sciences, b) engineering and technology, c) medical sciences, d) agricultural sciences, e) social sciences, f) humanities.From 1 June 2005 this division is included in Slovak law4, i.e., applies also to theSlovak research community.5 After the introduction of such a division into the ranking, it is clear thattheological faculties will not be compared with medical faculties or technicallyoriented faculties with social science faculties. However, it will be possible tocompare faculties with the same (or similar) scientific orientation side by side.Prospective students will thus be able to determine which faculty is the best amongthose providing education in their area of interest. To make it even more obvious2 In 2007, indicators were used that were slightly modified as compared to those of 2006.3 Frascati Manual, 6th Edition, OECD 2002, Paris, p. 67.4 Act No. 172/2005 on the Organisation of State Support for Research and Development and Additions to Act No.575/2001 on the Organisation of Government Activities and the Organisation of the Central State Administrationas amended.5 A more detailed breakdown is given in the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 1997,UNESCO, November 1997, and is described below in the text. ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 9 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  10. 10. that what is important is the ranking within groups and that in Slovak situation,universities virtually cannot be compared among themselves, as of 2006, ARRA hasceased publishing the cumulative table ranking all Slovak public higher educationinstitutions. It is also true at the same time that the quality of a higher educationinstitution is determined by the quality of its faculties (except for the University ofVeterinary Medicine and the Academy of Fine Arts, which have no faculties and aretherefore assessed as a whole). With respect to the above, ARRA decided to make,similarly as in 2005 and 2006, the rankings only on the basis of the results offaculties ranked in groups of subjects according to the prevailing orientation inaccordance with the Frascati Manual. The criteria (or indicators), by which ARRA produced its rankings, focus on theintensity of performance rather than on the overall performance. For example, one ofthe criteria is the total number of publications by the given faculty listed in the Webof Knowledge database produced by Thomson Scientific Co. (“WoK” )6 divided by thenumber of creative workers in the faculty (teachers and researchers with highereducation). If the number of creative workers did not divide the overall number ofpublications, the size of the faculty would be the main influence rather than theintensity of its work.7 The choice of criteria was also influenced by ARRA’s using only publiclyaccessible data. When collecting information on publications not included in the WoKdatabase, we used faculties’ information on their publication activities published ontheir websites. We did not request additional data from the faculties. The ranking of institutions under assessment thus produced is based onofficial data and domestic and foreign sources in the public domain. ARRA adhered tothis key principle also in this report’s assessments.6 http://www.thomson.com/scientific/scientific.jsp. Thanks to the Ministry of Education, all higher educationinstitutions have access to this database, as do the institutes of the Slovak Academy of Sciences, lecturers andresearch and artistic staff, the Accreditation Commission and the Ministry of Education.7 In previous reports, ARRA has been obtaining information on the number of scientific staff from the reports ofthe Ministry of Education of the Slovak Republic. Presently the Ministry discontinued collecting data in thisstructure. The present report uses data from the Institute of Information and Prognoses in Education, which usesa slightly different methodology. A comparison of data from these two sources showed that there were nosignificant differences that would have influenced the ranking of the faculties and universities under assessment. ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 10 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  11. 11. Detailed information on the assessment methodology may be found inAppendix 1; the following text presents an overview of changes in the methodologyapplied this year. As mentioned above, only minor modifications to the methodology were madein the present report versus that of 2006. The assessment now includes the Facultyof Theology of the Catholic University in Ružomberok, which satisfied the condition ofat least three years of existence. Faculties not assessed by ARRA due to notsatisfying this condition this year can be found in Table 1.Table 1: Faculties not assessed in the 2007 ReportUniversity Faculty Year establishedUniversity of Prešov Faculty of Management 2004University of Prešov Faculty of Sports 2004Catholic University Faculty of Healthcare 2004Constantine the Philosopher University Faculty of Central European Studies 2004 Faculty of Informatics and InformationSlovak University of Technology Technologies 2004Technical University of Košice Faculty of Aeronautics 2004 ARRA also continued assigning compensation points to faculties existing lessthan 10 years to prevent them from being handicapped versus those existing for alonger period. Their list including the compensation factors for 2007 and 2006 isgiven in Table 2. The compensation is applied in criteria, in which the period underassessment exceeds the condition of three years of faculty existence, i.e., in criteriain the publications and citations group (see below). ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 11 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  12. 12. Table 2: Faculties assigned compensation points in the 2007 Report (thelast column shows the last year’s compensation factor in brackets)University Faculty Year Compensation established factorComenius University Faculty of Social and Economic 2002 10/5 Sciences (10/4)University of Prešov Faculty of Healthcare 2002 10/5 (10/4)Catholic University Faculty of Philosophy 2002 10/5 (10/4)Catholic University Faculty of Theology 2003 10/4 (10/3)Catholic University Faculty of Education 2002 10/5 (10/4)Constantine the Philosopher Faculty of Social Sciences and 2002 10/5University Healthcare (10/4)Trnava University Faculty of Law 1999 10/8 (10/7)Technical University of Košice Faculty of Arts 1999 10/8 (10/7)University of Žilina Faculty of Special Engineering 2002 10/5 (10/4)University of Economics Faculty of International Relations 2000 10/7 (10/6)Slovak University of Agriculture Faculty of Biotechnology and Food 2002 10/5 Sciences (10/4)Slovak University of Agriculture Faculty of European Studies and 2002 10/5 Regional Development (10/4) More substantial changes occurred in the interpretation of the FrascatiManual. ARRA decided to include healthcare faculties in the MED group. The mainreason is the study subject being more related to the MED group rather than to theSOC group where they were classified before. This involves the Faculty of Healthcareand Social Work, Trnava University; and the Faculty of Social Sciences andHealthcare, Constantine the Philosopher University. The most significant change can be considered to be the taking into accountpublications not included in the WoK in the assessment of faculties in the HUM andSOC groups. As opposed to the 2006 Report, criterion VV1, which included only thenumbers of publications reflected in the WoK database (now indicated as VV1A), wasextended – for faculties from the HUM and SOC groups – with data from facultyannual reports on publications in reviewed journals not included in the WoK ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 12 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  13. 13. database (indicated as VV1a) and data on book publications not included in the WoKdatabase (indicated as VV1b). Journal publications are structured into several types in faculty reports. Thesewere assigned different weights. This year’s assessment, which is presented as apilot one, assigns weights to individual types of journal publications as indicated inARRA Newsletter No. 2. The weights are given in Table 3. When including theseweights and converting them per creative worker, faculty was assigned – in additionto points obtained for WoK publications (original criterion VV1) – additional points forother publications, each faculty being able to obtain a maximum of 20 points. Theassessment included a summary number of points for all journal publications in total. Table 3: Weights for journal publications of faculties not reflected in the WoK output weight Foreign scientific journals 8 Local scientific journals 4 Foreign technical journals 6 Local technical journals 3 Papers in international conference proceedings 4 Papers in local conference proceedings 2 Invited lectures abroad 8 Invited lectures – local 4 A similar procedure was applied to book publications. Table 4: Weights for book publications of faculties not reflected in the WoK output weight Scientific and artistic monographs by foreign publishers 20 Scientific and artistic monographs by local publishers 10 Technical book publications by foreign publishers 8 Technical book publications by local publishers 4 Chapters in scientific and artistic monographs by foreign publishers 8 Chapters in scientific and artistic monographs by local publishers 4 ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 13 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  14. 14. Chapters in technical book publications by foreign publishers 4 Chapters in technical book publications by local publishers 2 Higher education textbooks by foreign publishers 16 Higher education textbooks by local publishers 8 Chapters in higher education textbooks by foreign publishers 8 Chapters in higher education textbooks by local publishers 4 Teaching texts (paperback textbooks, lectures, workbooks) 4 Chapters in teaching texts 2 Secondary school textbooks 7 Other 0 The inclusion of publications not covered by WoK in the assessment offaculties’ publication activity is motivated by several factors. At least several of themare presented for illustration. Numerous faculties publish relatively few publicationsin journals covered by the WoK database. For various faculties, this has differentcauses. These are sometimes historical. Where a faculty was formed from a facultyfocused on the preparation of future teachers for primary and secondary schools,then they mostly continued this tradition rather than trying to build strong groups inthe given scientific area capable of international competition. In other areas, forexample, in pedagogy, there are no Slovak journals that are included in the WoKdatabase. The issue of conditions and criteria for habilitations and inaugurations wasdealt with by ARRA Newsletter No. 4 of October 2007. The resulting situation, regardless of the causes, is such that the assessmenton the basis of publications in the WoK makes several faculties from the SOC andHUM groups stand out (in the opinion of report authors, rightly so), but gives zero ornearly zero assessment to a great majority of them in the “publications and citations”category. This does not enable differentiated assessment of various faculties whoseresearch and publication level is objectively different. After extensive discussions,ARRA therefore approached a modification to the methodology used. It continues toapply, however, that publications in the WoK are assigned the greatest weight, as inthe report authors’ opinion, they best reflect the quality of the scientific work of therespective institutions and are of internationally accepted informative value. ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 14 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  15. 15. Foreign institutions assessing the quality of science and research are facedwith similar problems. The solution applied in a pilot form by ARRA is one of severalpossible. Another possibility is to choose several local journals in the given area andinclude them in the assessment. Similar approach was used, for example, in the FRGwhen assessing faculties of law. ARRA worked on this idea but the work is in itsinitial stages and its possible application in the Slovak situation would requireconsiderable effort and costs. ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 15 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  16. 16. 4. Main results of the assessment This chapter of the report’s main part will present the results found in individual ARRA groups. We will outline trends that can be observed based on three-years’ monitoring of the indicators. In the conclusion of the chapter, we will provide information on the results of other projects that ARRA participates in and that are related to higher education. 4.1 Universities and faculties of the AGRO group teachers and applications publications AGRO students for study and citations PhD. study grants AVERAGE Average Average (SV1-SV4) (SV6-SV8) (VV1-VV3a) (VV4- VV6) (VV7-VV10) 2005 20061 University of Veterinary Medicine 90 92 80 73 70 81,1 83,4 81,62 Technical University in Zvolen 76 50 34 59 54 54,5 63,2 52,33 Slovak University of Agriculture 65 59 25 78 42 53,7 53,4 55,6 teachers applications publications and AGRO for study students (SV6-SV8) and citations PhD. study grants AVERAGE Average Average (VV1-VV3a) (VV4- VV6) (VV7-VV10) 2005 2006 (SV1-SV4)1 University of Veterinary Medicine University of Veterinary Medicine 90 92 80 73 70 81,1 83,8 81,62 Faculty of Biotechnology and Food Sciences Slovak University of Agriculture 72 52 56 66 67 62,6 41,3 62,43 Faculty of Forestry Technical University in Zvolen 87 44 57 45 67 59,9 65,5 57,04 Faculty of Agrobiology and Food Resources Slovak University of Agriculture 67 63 15 83 29 51,3 61,6 53,85 Faculty of Wood Sciences and Technology Technical University in Zvolen 65 56 10 74 42 49,2 55,5 50,66 Faculty of Horticulture and Landscape Engineering Slovak University of Agriculture 55 62 4 86 30 47,3 57,1 47,5 In the group of agricultural faculties, a swap on the fifth and sixth places occurred, thanks to which the Technical University in Zvolen moved one rank higher. The position of the University of Veterinary Medicine in this group remains unchanged. ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 16 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  17. 17. 4.2 Universities and faculties of the HUM group teachers and applications publications HUM students for study and citations PhD. study grants AVERAGE Average Average (SV1-SV4) (SV6-SV8) (VV1-VV3a) (VV4- VV6) (VV7-VV10) 2005 20061 Academy of Music and Dramatic Arts 81 60 1 65 3 42,0 48,2 41,72 Comenius University 55 45 26 52 25 40,6 47,5 36,73 University of Trnava 61 36 15 52 36 40,0 51,6 39,94 Academy of Fine Arts and Design 62 83 - 40 12 39,5 52,3 39,65 University of Prešov 49 35 28 25 25 32,6 46,2 36,66 Constantine the Philosopher University 39 58 1 31 11 27,9 38,9 24,87 Academy of Arts 61 51 3 13 7 27,0 37,4 28,28 Technical University of Košice 43 63 0 - 5 22,3 27,6 36,69 Matej Bel University 41 33 5 19 4 20,4 28,8 2210 Catholic University 36 29 5 23 3 19,3 30,9 22,211 University of St. Cyril and Methodius 38 31 6 - 16 18,1 27,7 20,1 teachers HUM and applications publications AVERAGE students for study and citations PhD. study grants Average Average (SV1-SV4) (SV6-SV8) (VV1-VV3a) (VV4- VV6) (VV7-VV10) 2005 2006 1 Faculty of Arts Comenius University 56 44 50 44 62 51,0 64,7 44,9 2 Faculty of Humanities and Natural Sciences University of Prešov 49 35 74 14 67 47,6 53,0 47,6 3 Faculty of Theology University of Trnava 70 39 2 71 50 46,3 44,7 42,5 4 Faculty of Music and Dance Academy of Music and Dramatic Arts 82 69 0 61 1 42,6 42,6 43,3 5 Faculty of Theatre Arts Academy of Music and Dramatic Arts 85 52 1 42 32 42,3 49,0 39,3 6 Faculty of Film and Television Academy of Music and Dramatic Arts 81 52 1 68 4 41,3 47,9 42,7 7 Academy of Fine Arts and Design Academy of Fine Arts and Design 62 83 - 40 12 39,5 50,1 39,6 8 Evangelical Theological Faculty Comenius University 55 54 25 51 12 39,4 42,3 36,5 9 Faculty of Performing Arts Academy of Arts 73 67 0 12 19 34,1 47,1 34,610 Faculty of Arts University of Trnava 51 34 28 33 22 33,8 51,0 37,311 Faculty of Arts University of Prešov 47 37 35 27 16 32,2 53,8 42,612 Roman Catholic Theological Faculty of Cyril and Methodius Comenius University 54 37 4 63 - 31,5 42,0 28,813 Orthodox Theological Faculty University of Prešov 60 34 2 46 13 31,3 43,4 35,214 Faculty of Fine Arts and Design Academy of Arts 66 65 1 12 8 30,3 34,6 24,715 Faculty of Arts Constantine the Philosopher University 39 58 1 31 11 27,9 35,3 24,816 Faculty of the Humanities Matej Bel University 42 35 9 32 9 25,5 35,2 27,117 Faculty of Dramatic Arts Academy of Arts 68 48 1 - - 23,5 32,4 25,318 Faculty of Arts Technical University of Košice 43 63 0 - 5 22,3 28,0 36,619 Faculty of Arts Catholic University 36 25 10 26 3 20,0 26,5 22,220 Greek Catholic Theological Faculty University of Prešov 41 34 2 13 6 19,4 27,9 21,021 Faculty of Theology Catholic University 36 32 1 21 3 18,6 n.a. n.a.22 Faculty of Arts University of St. Cyril and Methodius 38 31 6 - 16 18,1 27,4 20,123 Faculty of Philology Matej Bel University 41 31 1 5 - 15,4 20,5 16,9 Only several more significant shifts occurred among the faculties with prevailing focus on humanities. The move of the Comenius University Faculty of Philosophy from the second to the first rank may be seen as a trend – last year already it progressed two ranks to the second position. The Faculty of Theology, Trnava University, did better than last year (moving from the sixth rank to the third one); the Faculty of Music, Academy of Arts improved too. On the contrary, the ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 17 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  18. 18. Faculty of Philosophy of Prešov fell from the fifth to the eleventh rank and even deeper drop was experienced by the Faculty of Arts, Technical University in Košice. Changes in faculties’ rankings occurred also due to Comenius University’s progress from the fourth to the second place in the group. 4.3 Universities and faculties of the MED group teachers and applications publications MED students for study and citations PhD. study grants AVERAGE Average Average (SV1-SV4) (SV6-SV8) (VV1-VV3a) (VV4- VV6) (VV7-VV10) 2005 20061 Comenius University 83 80 53 40 60 63,3 71,1 73,62 University of Trnava 64 38 97 100 4 60,7 n.a. n.a.3 Pavol Jozef Šafárik University 72 62 51 36 46 53,5 67,7 54,44 Constantine the Philosopher University 32 57 1 42 33 32,9 n.a. n.a.5 University of Prešov 25 41 1 22 - 17,7 n.a. n.a. teachers MED and applications publications AVERAGE students for study and citations PhD. study grants Average Average (SV1-SV4) (SV6-SV8) (VV1-VV3a) (VV4- VV6) (VV7-VV10) 2005 20061 Jessenius Faculty of Medicine Comenius University 83 85 32 52 94 69,2 72,3 78,82 Faculty of Pharmacy Comenius University 75 79 85 24 60 64,6 79,3 78,53 Faculty of Health Care and Social Work University of Trnava 64 38 97 100 4 60,7 n.a. n.a.4 Faculty of Medicine Comenius University 90 75 42 45 27 56,0 63,0 63,65 Faculty of Medicine Pavol Jozef Šafárik University 72 62 51 36 46 53,5 70,7 54,46 Faculty of Social Sciences and Health Constantine the Philosopher University 32 57 1 42 33 32,9 n.a. n.a.7 Faculty of Health Care University of Prešov 25 41 1 22 - 17,7 n.a. n.a. No changes occurred among medical and healthcare faculties. In 2007, this group included three healthcare-oriented faculties, previously assessed within the SOC group. Interestingly, the Faculty of Healthcare and Social Work, Trnava University, did very good among well-established medical faculties and took the third place overall. The success of this faculty is underlined by the fact that it outperformed Comenius University’s Faculty of Medicine and the Faculty of Medicine of Pavol Jozef Šafárik University in Košice. This group of “healthcare” faculties undoubtedly includes St. Elizabeth University of Health and Social Sciences. It was assessed only experimentally (not included in the ranking) with respect to different nature of data and unavailability of certain necessary information (explained above). However, if it was assessed, it would rank between the second and third third of the table. ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 18 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  19. 19. 4.4 Universities and faculties of the NAT group teachers and applications publications NAT students for study and citations PhD. study grants AVERAGE Average Average (SV1-SV4) (SV6-SV8) (VV1-VV3a) (VV4- VV6) (VV7-VV10) 2005 20061 Comenius University 87 66 73 81 80 77,5 77,6 81,92 Pavol Jozef Šafárik University 78 54 67 67 43 61,7 67,2 65,43 Technical University in Zvolen 55 65 13 75 34 48,4 48,5 46,24 Constantine the Philosopher University 52 79 13 60 29 46,4 46,3 50,15 Matej Bel University 42 44 13 37 16 30,2 40,9 34,16 University of St. Cyril and Methodius 52 42 12 7 12 25,1 28,5 23,97 University of Žilina 36 62 1 14 9 24,3 37,1 27,8 teachers NAT and applications publications AVERAGE students for study and citations PhD. study grants Average Average (SV1-SV4) (SV6-SV8) (VV1-VV3a) (VV4- VV6) (VV7-VV10) 2005 20061 Faculty of Mathematics, Physics and Informatics Comenius University 98 55 96 71 83 80,5 82,3 82,62 Faculty of Natural Sciences Comenius University 77 77 51 91 77 74,5 72,0 81,23 Faculty of Natural Sciences Pavol Jozef Šafárik University 78 54 67 67 43 61,7 68,2 65,44 Faculty of Ecology and Environmental Sciences Technical University in Zvolen 55 65 13 75 34 48,4 47,0 46,25 Faculty of Natural Sciences Constantine the Philosopher University 52 79 13 60 29 46,4 44,9 50,16 Faculty of Natural Sciences Matej Bel University 42 44 13 37 16 30,2 37,1 34,17 Faculty of Natural Sciences University of St. Cyril and Methodius 52 42 12 7 12 25,1 25,8 23,98 Faculty of Natural Sciences University of Žilina 36 62 1 14 9 24,3 35,4 27,8 Faculties focused on natural sciences form one of the most stable groups. In the year under assessment, certain faculties swapped places but the differences in terms of points remained small. The Faculty of Ecology and Environmental Sciences of the Technical University in Zvolen returned to the fourth place and pushed the Faculty of Natural Sciences of Constantine the Philosopher University back to the fifth place where it had been in 2005. At the end of the table, faculties of the University of SS Cyril and Methodius and of Žilina University swapped places. These changes were exactly copied also in the assessment of universities in this group. Comenius University holds the lead, represented by two faculties in the forefront positions: the Faculty of Natural Sciences (2nd place) and the Faculty of Mathematics, Physics and Informatics (1st place). ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 19 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  20. 20. 4.5 Universities and faculties of the SOC group teachers and applications publications SOC students for study and citations PhD. study grants AVERAGE Average Average (SV1-SV4) (SV6-SV8) (VV1-VV3a) (VV4- VV6) (VV7-VV10) 2005 20061 Technical University of Košice 59 41 25 22 90 47,5 49,0 462 Slovak University of Agriculture 58 56 23 50 37 44,7 43,0 40,93 University of Trnava 69 35 43 28 42 43,6 51,2 474 University of Žilina 62 69 1 53 18 40,6 45,2 39,75 University of Economics 66 39 20 51 22 39,7 36,6 34,86 Comenius University 65 56 19 44 14 39,6 41,5 37,67 Constantine the Philosopher University 52 43 2 41 25 32,5 30,0 32,48 Matej Bel University 67 43 6 27 13 31,1 31,1 28,69 Pavol Jozef Šafárik University 60 37 12 9 8 25,3 30,7 27,510 Catholic University 44 32 7 18 14 23,1 34,4 23,811 University of Prešov 48 33 1 24 9 22,9 35,5 24,612 University of St. Cyril and Methodius 41 64 1 - 8 22,8 25,9 22,313 Alexander Dubček University in Trenčín 39 39 1 - 13 18,5 27,6 27,3 teachers SOC and applications publications AVERAGE students for study and citations PhD. study grants Average Average (SV1-SV4) (SV6-SV8) (VV1-VV3a) (VV4- VV6) (VV7-VV10) 2005 2006 1 Faculty of International Relations University of Economics 67 69 18 96 43 58,8 40,4 48,8 2 Faculty of Physical Education and Sports Comenius University 82 44 22 70 28 49,1 51,9 47,5 3 Faculty of Education University of Trnava 66 34 82 26 37 48,9 37,6 39,0 4 Faculty of Economics Technical University of Košice 59 41 25 22 90 47,5 47,5 46,0 5 Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences Comenius University 76 70 54 21 16 47,3 40,6 35,6 6 Faculty of European Studies and Regional Development Slovak University of Agriculture 48 45 39 48 53 46,5 34,1 37,7 7 Faculty of Economics and Management Slovak University of Agriculture 67 67 8 52 22 43,0 46,6 44,2 8 Faculty of Operation and Economics of Transport and Communications University of Žilina 62 69 1 53 18 40,6 39,9 39,7 9 Faculty of Commerce University of Economics 62 35 31 54 15 39,3 35,6 37,810 Faculty of Business Economics University of Economics 64 33 21 46 32 39,0 32,2 28,911 Faculty of Law University of Trnava 73 36 4 31 48 38,4 34,4 37,412 Faculty of Political Sciences and International Relations Matej Bel University 87 38 8 30 28 38,4 30,1 28,013 Faculty of Management Comenius University 50 71 9 54 6 38,1 32,7 34,414 Faculty of National Economy University of Economics 76 30 24 38 17 37,2 36,7 34,815 Faculty of Law Comenius University 58 60 3 37 11 33,7 36,8 33,716 Faculty of Education Matej Bel University 66 45 7 37 12 33,4 30,2 29,417 Faculty of Economic Informatics University of Economics 57 35 21 40 10 32,6 31,8 29,118 Faculty of Education Constantine the Philosopher University 52 43 2 41 25 32,5 35,7 31,819 Faculty of Business Management University of Economics 68 33 9 35 12 31,1 32,8 29,520 Faculty of Education Comenius University 60 36 5 40 10 30,0 40,1 37,021 Faculty of Law Pavol Jozef Šafárik University 73 40 10 18 8 29,8 32,5 27,922 Faculty of Economics Matej Bel University 55 41 7 27 8 27,6 32,9 32,623 Faculty of Law Matej Bel University 60 49 0 14 2 25,2 28,6 24,424 Faculty of Education Catholic University 44 32 7 18 14 23,1 31,9 23,825 Faculty of Education University of Prešov 48 33 1 24 9 22,9 33,0 39,026 Faculty of Mass Media Communication University of St. Cyril and Methodius 41 64 1 - 8 22,8 25,0 22,327 Faculty of Public Administration Pavol Jozef Šafárik University 48 33 15 - 8 20,9 30,0 37,128 Faculty of Social and Economic Relations Alexander Dubček University in Trenčín 39 39 1 - 13 18,5 26,1 27,1 Compared to 2006, three healthcare faculties were moved from the SOC group to the MED group, including the previous leader of the group – the Faculty of Healthcare and Social Work, Trnava University. Among the faculties that remained in the group, the best position was kept by the University of Economics’ Faculty of International Relations. The most significant move is the progress of the Matej Bel ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 20 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  21. 21. University’s Faculty of Political Sciences and International Relations from the 22nd (taking into consideration the reclassification of healthcare faculties) to the 12th place. The only representative of Trenčín University did worse – the Faculty of Social and Economic Relations. By taking the last place, it placed its parent university at the end of the SOC group ranking. What is noteworthy is also the move of Trnava University’s Faculty of Education from the seventh (or sixth) place to the third one. For the first time in the three years of assessment and still as the only one in the SOC group, Trnava University’s Faculty of Education has a publication cited more than 25 times, which also proves that even at SOC-type faculties, papers with international response can be created. 4.6 Universities and faculties of the TECH group teachers and applications publications TECH students for study and citations PhD. study grants AVERAGE Average Average (SV1-SV4) (SV6-SV8) (VV1-VV3a) (VV4- VV6) (VV7-VV10) 2005 2006 1 Slovak University of Technology 65 57 30 48 49 49,7 51,9 51,5 2 Technical University of Košice 54 41 11 49 33 37,9 47,5 41,3 3 University of Žilina 52 48 4 43 29 35,2 40,1 34,6 4 Technical University in Zvolen 59 40 0 43 13 31,0 55,5 39,9 5 Slovak University of Agriculture 56 44 2 29 18 29,8 42,0 33,8 6 Alexander Dubček University in Trenčín 52 34 11 28 22 29,5 40,1 21,4 teachers TECH and applications publications AVERAGE students for study and citations PhD. study grants Average Average (SV1-SV4) (SV6-SV8) (VV1-VV3a) (VV4- VV6) (VV7-VV10) 2005 2006 1 Faculty of Chemical and Food Technology Slovak University of Technology 100 46 100 77 98 84,1 80,4 82,5 2 Faculty of Electrical Engineering Slovak University of Technology 66 50 40 49 81 57,1 58,6 61,1 3 Faculty of Mechanical Engineering University of Žilina 67 35 6 68 67 48,6 49,8 46,9 4 Faculty of Mechanical Engineering Slovak University of Technology 58 65 15 39 41 43,8 45,5 46,6 5 Faculty of Mining, Ecology, Process Control and Geotechnology University of Košice Technical 41 51 15 69 40 43,4 53,4 46,2 6 Faculty of Metallurgy Technical University of Košice 67 34 18 63 28 42,2 51,7 48,4 7 Faculty of Architecture Slovak University of Technology 62 86 0 51 10 41,8 45,6 47,1 8 Faculty of Industrial Technologies Alexander Dubček University in Trenčín 56 35 27 38 51 41,5 48,4 43 9 Faculty of Civil Engineering Slovak University of Technology 60 47 19 40 32 39,5 47,2 41,310 Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Informatics Technical University of Košice 57 41 12 43 30 36,4 49,9 39,811 Faculty of Civil Engineering University of Žilina 51 60 0 37 32 36,0 34,8 32,912 Faculty of Civil Engineering Technical University of Košice 65 46 14 34 21 35,9 44,5 38,313 Faculty of Mechanical Engineering Technical University of Košice 46 37 6 56 32 35,3 50,4 38,814 Faculty of Manufacturing Technologies Technical University of Košice 51 40 2 30 49 34,4 38,2 36,615 Faculty of Electrical Engineering University of Žilina 58 43 5 35 23 32,9 39,3 35,216 Faculty of Material Sciences and Technology Slovak University of Technology 44 45 7 32 33 32,0 33,1 30,417 Faculty of Environmental and Manufacturing Technology Technical University in Zvolen 59 40 0 43 13 31,0 39,9 54,518 Faculty of Management Science and Informatics University of Žilina 39 47 8 45 10 30,0 n.a. 32,219 Faculty of Agricultural Engineering Slovak University of Agriculture 56 44 2 29 18 29,8 41,1 33,820 Faculty of Special Engineering University of Žilina 43 54 - 31 14 28,4 35,7 35,921 Faculty of Special Technology Alexander Dubček University in Trenčín 60 33 - 26 8 25,5 33,4 31,822 Faculty of Mechatronics Alexander Dubček University in Trenčín 41 33 5 20 8 21,4 28,3 19,5 ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 21 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  22. 22. The ranking of universities in the TECH group of faculties is relatively stable.The only change is the swapping of places between the Technical University inZvolen, which moved from the third to the fourth place, and Žilina University. To aconsiderable extent, this move can be attributed to the Faculty of Environmental andProduction Technologies of the Technical University in Zvolen, which dropped fromthe tenth to the seventeenth place. This decline only underlines the falling trend,with this faculty having reached the third rank in the TECH group in the 2005assessment. Overall, it has lost 14 positions since 2005. The faculties of ŽilinaUniversity improved only moderately. The most successful faculty of this university isthe Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, which took the 3rd rank (compared to lastyear’s fifth). A drop among the best faculties of this group was seen again by theFaculty of Metallurgy of the Technical University of Košice (third last year) losingthree ranks similarly as the Faculty of Architecture of the Slovak University ofTechnology (a drop from the fourth to the seventh place). The institution with theleast satisfactory ranking in the group continues to be Trenčín University ofAlexander Dubček. ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 22 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  23. 23. 4.7 Results of other ARRA projects4.7.1 Student Survey project ARRA considers students to be an important source of information abouthigher education institutions. They have the direct experience. Therefore at the endof 2006, ARRA, jointly with the GfK Slovakia research agency, conducted a survey ofstudents’ satisfaction with higher education institutions. The survey results werepublished in March 2007 in ARRA Newsletter No. 2/2007. ARRA’s objective was, in cooperation with GfK Slovakia, to gradually prepare asurvey involving a representative part of students of all faculties of Slovak highereducation institutions so that the results objectively reflect the reality also on thelevel of faculties. The higher education student satisfaction survey conducted at the turn of2006 and 2007 is representative with respect to all full-time students of highereducation institutions in Slovakia. Data collection took place between 9 Novemberand 31 December 2006 on a sample of 2,015 respondents. The survey wasconducted on a target group of second and higher year students. It will become partof the general assessment once representative participation of students of allfaculties is reached. Full time students of higher education institutions are not very satisfied withtheir study. Full satisfaction was expressed by only approximately one seventh of thestudents (14%). Next 45% are moderately satisfied with their institution. Explicitdissatisfaction was expressed by nearly 20% of students. The survey was determining satisfaction even in a greater detail withinindividual aspects of the study. Students are most satisfied with their teachers. Onthe contrary, they are least satisfied with the organisation of teaching and availabilityand use of computers and the Internet at the institutions. The situation differs very much at different faculties (even at the sameuniversity). There is great satisfaction with certain faculties while with others it isrelatively low. However, the sample size in this survey does not enable a moredetailed insight into individual faculties. ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 23 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  24. 24. definitely not 7,8% definitely rather not yes 17,6% 34,3% Likewise, the students’ loyalty to their institution is reduced. neither yes, nor no Approximately one third of the 8,9% present higher education students rather yes would not recommend the institution 31,4% they are studying at to theirGraph 1: If you were able to decide acquaintances. Similarly, one third ofagain whether to start studying at the respondents would not chooseyour present faculty or at another their institution again. Only one thirdfaculty, would you choose your present of students are certain about theirfaculty again? repeated choice of the same faculty (34%). When students were choosing the present institution, they took intoconsideration a number of various criteria. The quality of the institution and latercareer prospects were not the most important factor for each student. Importantreasons included, for example, the vicinity of the institution, friends studying in thesame town, but also admission without entrance tests. The demand in high quality ofthe higher education institution is not very obvious and unambiguous on the part ofstudents. According to the reasons based on which they chose the higher educationinstitution, the students could be divided into four categories: Good institution (28% of students) The main reason for selecting an institution was its quality. What was taken into consideration was the institution’s prestige, quality of teachers, career prospects. As cheap as possible (24% of students) They chose the institution according to the distance from their home. The objective was to minimise the costs of the studies. Other reasons were not important. ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 24 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  25. 25. The easier way (23% of students) These students had no choice. They study at an institution that was the only one to accept them, or they were admitted to the institution without entrance tests (and tried nowhere else). Student life (25% of students) More important than the choice of the institution was the choice of the place where the institution resides. The primary reasons included friends, possibility of working while studying, etc. The quality of the studies was secondary. Only a little more than half of the students are of the opinion that theknowledge they are acquiring at the institution will be useful in the practice (53%).One third of the students find it partially useful (35%). What is encouraging is that over 80% of students want to work in an areaidentical with or similar to the one they are studying at the moment. About one sixthof students plan to work in a different area (17%). I have not thought about definitely in it yet another area 4,4% 4,3% rather in another area definitely in 12,7% the same area 33,1% rather in the Graph 2: Once you finish your same area 45,5% studies, do you plan to work in the same area as you studied? Approximately 60% of students attend institutions outside of the area of theirdomicile. Approximately 43% of students live at various types of dormitories and17% live in private rented accommodation. A large majority of university students work while studying. Onlyapproximately 17% of students do not make any money. An average student has ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 25 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  26. 26. slightly less than SKK 5000 available per month. However, one tenth of studentshave over SKK 10,000 available per month. Student Survey project was kindly supported by ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 26 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  27. 27. 4.7.2 Project “Top Scientists” The discussion on the reform of higher education in Slovakia is oftenreduced only to the number of higher education students and less is spoken aboutthe quality of education they are receiving. The quality of education cannot beseparated from the quality of scientific and research work. Since the establishment offirst universities, these institutions were not only the centres of knowledge but alsoof its further deepening and development. The public discussion on the quality of science in Slovakia often does notrely on facts but rather on subjective opinions of the involved. This is one of thereasons why ARRA, with the support from the Penta Foundation, decided to identifytop scientists in Slovakia and show how they compare with international competitors. International comparisons of the quality of science in Slovakia show thatSlovakia is significantly lagging behind comparable countries of the European Unionin the dynamics of acquisition of internationally recognised scientific knowledge.Between 1995 and 2006, the scientific production measured by the number ofpublications in journals listed in Current Contents increased by mere 14%. Forcomparison, in the Czech Republic this increase was 99.5% and in Poland as manyas 113.5%. In the per capita figure, Slovakia outperformed only Poland. On the otherhand, in 1995, Slovakia ranked second after Austria. When we compare the scientificbase and tradition of scientific work before 1995 with the results in 2005, we cannotarrive at a conclusion other than that creative scientific activity is stagnating.Table 5: Numbers of publications in WoS in the period of 1995 – 2006 inselected countries. number of papers perState 1995 2006 change in % million residentsCzech Republic 3,756 7,494 99.5 749.4Hungary 3,666 6,127 67 612.7Poland 8,077 17,244 113.5 431.1Austria 6,437 11,205 74 1,600.7Slovakia 2,179 2,494 14 479.6 ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 27 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  28. 28. Therefore in 2007, ARRA started to work in a project with the objective ofidentifying scientists with exceptional, internationally comparable results. In the firstphase, the project was implemented in physics and chemistry and the results arepublished on ARRA website. In cooperation with experts from other disciplines, theproject continues in biology, mathematics, economics, pharmaceutics, medicalsciences, earth sciences, and environmental sciences. The methodology is based on a generally acceptable fact that significantscientific results must be reviewed and particularly published so that they areaccessible to broad international scientific community, be subject to analysis andcriticism, and particularly that the results can be followed up by other scientists. Thisis why we used standard indicators recognised internationally – publications andresponses thereto (citations) according to international databases, namely the Webof Science (WoS). For the identification of significant scientists, individual personalities, it isappropriate to use a somewhat different approach than for universal assessments ofentire institutions. Our methodology relies on Hirsch “h-index”, which was defined byphysicist Jorge E. Hirsch in 2005 (Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., USA) as the measure ofimpact of individual’s scientific work. This “h-index” expresses the highest number ofpublications, of which each is cited at least h times. For example, E. J. Corey,laureate of the Nobel Prize for chemistry, has an h-index of 132, which means thathe published 132 papers, each of which was cited at least 132 times. It should benoted that this is a challenging indicator. A lower h-index may be significantlyinfluenced by self-citations (when some of the co-authors cites his/her own work).This is why we eliminated self-citations in our methodology (as the WoS counts themin), which reduces the original h-index. We refer to such index as H-index.Table 6: Citation rates for publications in the world in individual fields in1995 – 2006 Average number of Limit H-index Number of Scientific discipline Citations citations per for top publications publication scientistsBiology 542,513 8,482,803 15.64 18Chemistry 1,070,973 9339628 8.72 15 ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 28 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  29. 29. Economics 140,075 631,644 4.51 5Pharmaceutics 159,810 1,596,203 9.99 12Physics 854,823 6,407,290 7.5 13Mathematics 220,644 611,306 2.77 6Environmentalsciences 221,284 1,909,148 8.63 12Earth sciences 245,179 1,950,007 7.95 10Medical sciences 1,868,486 20,643,979 11.05 15 The publication frequency and the average number of citations per paperdiffer for individual scientific disciplines, as shown in Table 6 according to data fromthe WoS. If we are to reflect the success of scientists in individual disciplines, thisfact needs to be taken into consideration. Chemical sciences show an averagecitation frequency approximately in the centre of the interval. We will analyse this ina more detailed ARRA report for individual scientific disciplines, which will bepublished in the first half of 2008. Table 7: Number of top scientists Number of scientists Number of scientists a Scientific discipline with H greater than with a publication cited the limit more than 100 times Biology 3 3 Chemistry 21 16 Economics 0 0 Pharmaceutics 2 0 Physics 11 6 Mathematics 12 2 Environmental sciences 0 0 Earth sciences 2 0 Medical sciences 3 3 Table 7 documents the scientific contribution of Slovak scientists tointernational science in individual scientific disciplines. The second column of Table 7shows the number of scientists with an H-index equal to or greater than the limitvalue given in Table 6. The greatest number of top scientists are in natural sciences, ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 29 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  30. 30. particularly in chemistry, physics, and mathematics. On the other hand, economicsand environmental sciences do not have a single representative. The last column of Table 7 shows the number of scientists in individualscientific disciplines who exceed the limit H-index and at the same time publisheda paper cited in the WoS at least 100 times, i.e., except for biology, 10 times morethan the average citation rate. A paper cited more than 100 times is certainly asignificant contribution on the international scale in the given scientific discipline. Ifan author has a high H-index and, at the same time, at least one paper cited morethan 100 times, he/she should be considered a “super top” of the Slovak science.Most authors of such papers are in chemistry. Some of them published severalpapers that were cited more than 100 times. Some of them reach 400 citations. When we take a look at the workplaces of the best scientists in thedisciplines analysed so far, we find that most of them work at Comenius University(27, i.e., approximately one half of all top scientists identified by us), at the institutesof the Slovak Academy of Sciences (19) and at the Slovak University of Technology(7). Scientists with several significant multi-author papers work at ComeniusUniversity and at P. J. Šafárik University. These institutions were built in the longterm as centres of scientific research in Slovakia. The extensive parameters in Table 5, the number of publications registeredin international databases, clearly document the stagnation of the Slovak science.Unfortunately, we also lag behind in the performance of top scientists. In oursuccessful disciplines, in chemistry and physics, we compared top Slovak and Czechscientists according to the h-index. There are substantially more Czech scientistsexceeding the limit values than suggested by the proportion of both countries’populations, and absolute values – namely in chemistry – are higher than theanalogous parameters in Slovakia. In the Slovak science, we have only several trulyinternationally recognised personalities. Project “Top Scientists” was kindly supported by ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 30 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  31. 31. 4.7.3 Information from the Profesia.sk portal The quality of higher education cannot be separated from the success ofhigher education institutions’ graduates in the labour market. The demand in highereducation institution graduates is the reflection of the reputation that the givenhigher education institution or faculty has among the public. This indicates thequality of the education institution – its teaching as well as scientific part. ARRAconsiders the link between the labour market and the education sphere to be crucialfor the increase of the higher education quality as well as for further economicgrowth of Slovakia and has therefore viewed the success of graduates in the labourmarket, the number of unemployed graduates, and the employers’ opinion asimportant indicators of quality of the given higher education institution. ARRA approached employers with a request of cooperation in creating anoverview of their requirements or preferences in the recruitment of new employees.This effort of ARRA has not been successful so far. Only few employers were willingto provide information and even this data was not sufficiently representative tounderstand the general situation of graduates in the labour market. On the otherhand, the information on the number of unemployed graduates does not provide asufficient picture, as their total number is very low and the distribution among highereducation institutions is rather random. Due to the above-mentioned reason, ARRA decided to obtain relevantinformation from a source other than the employers. It established cooperation withthe Profesia.sk portal, the largest web portal mediating job offers to job seekers. Theservices offered by Profesia.sk include an option for the job seekers to send theirstandardised curriculum vitae to the portal registry, from which the employers selectappropriate candidates for vacant positions. Since 1 January 2006, approximately88,000 CV’s were added to the database and 18,000 CV’s were selected byemployers as appropriate for the positions open by them. This data file is the most important one for ARRA. It does not only show thestructure of job seekers but also provides information as to which job seekers weresought by the companies. The data processed brought new, previously unpublishedfacts about the reputation of education institutions in Slovakia but also about the ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 31 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900
  32. 32. ratio of supply and demand in the labour market in relation to higher educationinstitution graduates. When assessing the indicator “employers’ interest in graduates”, the strongposition of private higher education institutions was apparent, as they dominated thetop ten institutions. After a deeper analysis of the results it can be concluded that itwas significantly influenced by the composition of students and graduates of privatehigher education institutions. The students of this kind of institutions include many ofthose who study while working and study only to increase their qualification. Thistherefore does not involve regular graduates without experience in full-time jobs butrather people with working experience that is highly appreciated by the employersand these graduates thus have a comparative advantage against those enrolled inhigher education institutions immediately after completing their secondary education,that is, against most of the higher education institution graduates. The discussion on the relation between education and the labour marketincludes also the factor of graduates becoming employed within the specialisationthey graduated in. Graduates of faculties of electrical engineering and informaticsrank best. The first ten faculties include as many as 7 faculties with thisspecialisation. The other end of this ranking shows faculties with a focus on thehumanities or social sciences, including, for example, faculties of education.Graduates of these faculties usually get jobs particularly in administration or in otherfields unrelated to the field they graduated in. What is a surprising finding is the fact that only few primary and secondaryschools seek employees through the Profesia.sk portal. On the one hand, there is arelatively strong declared interest in the work in the education sector and, on theother hand, there is the publicised lack of teachers at primary and secondary schools.Only private primary and secondary schools seek employees on the Internet. Aquestion arises as to how the recruitment of new staff in public education sectoroccurs, these constituting an overwhelming majority of the segment. The situation in healthcare is somewhat different with no demand on the partof employers and no supply on the part of job seekers. It can be assumed thathealthcare facilities find new staff using other than public channels. ARRA, Ivana Bukovčana 16, 84107 Bratislava, IČO: 30857091, Reg. č. VVS/1-900/90-245 03 32 tel.: +421 2 5443 2246 www.arra.sk E-mail: arra@arra.sk Bank. Spoj.: Slovenská sporiteľňa, č. ú.: 0178751805/0900

×