K.U.Leuven Association - case study

Founded in 1425, the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven is a Flemish University of Catholic signature with an international orientation. It has the legal statue of private institution and encompasses almost all academic disciplines. K.U.Leuven is a member of many high-profile international networks and associations such as LERU, Coimbra Group, EUA, etc.

Since July 11, 2002, the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven and twelve university colleges in Flanders have joined forces in the K.U.Leuven Association in order to occupy a position of strength within the new European educational landscape and to work together towards quality improvements in education. It is the largest educational association in Flanders.

With more than 76.000 students, it accounts for over 44% of the entire student population in Flemish higher education. It is an open and dynamic network, with a strong, influential position in Flanders. The K.U.Leuven Association primarily aims to offer a wide range of study and training programmes and to improve the quality of education and research through intensive cooperation.

The K.U.Leuven Association web site is at http://associatie.kuleuven.be/eng/

Institution

The present

General description of the institution in its current state, putting the e-learning into context

In order to implement the Bologna Declaration, Flanders has adapted its legislation on higher education. The decree on the restructuring of higher education (4 April 2003) translated the Bologna principles into Flemish regulations. These introduced a dual system of professional Bachelor’s degrees and academic Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees. A key element is the cooperation between universities and university colleges through the development of institutional partnerships. In future years, these partnerships will contribute to the creation of the European Higher Education Area.

The K.U.Leuven Association is based on close cooperation between K.U.Leuven and twelve university colleges.

• GROEP T – Internationale Hogeschool Leuven
• Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel
• Katholieke Hogeschool Brugge-Oostende
• Katholieke Hogeschool Leuven
• Katholieke Hogeschool Mechelen
• Katholieke Hogeschool Zuid-West-Vlaanderen
• Hogeschool Sint-Lukas Brussel
• Hogeschool voor Wetenschap & Kunst
• Katholieke Hogeschool Kempen
• Katholieke Hogeschool Limburg
• Katholieke Hogeschool Sint-Lieven
• Lessius Hogeschool

With more than 76.000 students, it accounts for over 44% of the entire student population in Flemish higher education. It is an open and dynamic network, with a strong, influential position in Flanders. The K.U.Leuven Association primarily aims to offer a wide range of study and training programmes and to improve the quality of education and research through intensive cooperation.

Number of students, in total and as full-time equivalents

The K.U.Leuven Association currently has 76.537 students of which 25.477 (33%) at the university and 51.060 (67%) at the university colleges.

The institution's "business model"

The members of the K.U.Leuven Association have opted for a strong decision-making and executive structure. Apart from the not for profit association form (imposed by the decree) it is a federation for which a personal integration on the level of the highest organs of the institutions concerned was chosen. The composition of the General Assembly of each of the members is identical for 60%. This identical part forms the General Assembly of the Association. The General Assembly consists of representatives of the university colleges and the university and of co-opted members. The members of the General Assembly of the not for profit Association form at the same time the common part (60%) of the General Assembly of the institutions concerned.

The Association’s policy is developed by various advisory groups, which deal with important issues such as education, research, student policy, finance, communication, internationalisation, diversity and quality management. These advisory groups have emerged from the cooperation between the institutional partners. They launch forward-looking projects which function across institutional boundaries. In the field of internationalisation, the members of the Association also strive to integrate their policies, to pool their resources and share their various areas of expertise.

Describe the institution's approach to virtual mobility.

The Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (K.U.Leuven) progressively organizes its educational support from a multicampus perspective, which includes several forms of virtual mobility. For more information, see the entry on multicampus.

Furthermore, in the long-range plan (2008-2013) of the steering group 'internationalisation' of the K.U.Leuven Association, virtual mobility is mentioned several times. One of the action points is that curricula should be built in that way that every student can have an international experience and explicitly mentions Virtual Mobility as one of the possibilities to do so.

The past

The institution's history since its foundation

• 1425: Founding of the K.U.Leuven by Pope Martin V with Latin as working language; K.U.Leuven is the oldest Catholic university in the world still in existence and the oldest university in the Low Countries
• 1797: Abolishment of the university by the French Republic
• 1835: Reopening of the university as Catholic University in Leuven
• 1911: For the first time increasing use of Dutch as teaching language
• 1936: Almost all lectures are taught in Dutch and French
• 1965: Founding of the Kortrijk Campus as undergraduate campus
• 1968: Splitting of the university into the Dutch-speaking Katholieke Universiteit Leuven and the French-speaking Université Catholique de Louvain. The Université Catholique de Louvain moves to the newly built campus in Louvain-la-Neuve. The Katholieke Universiteit Leuven remains in the historic town of Leuven.
• 11 July 2002: Founding of the K.U.Leuven Association in the framework of the Bologna declaration. The Association consists of 13 Flemish institutions of higher education (K.U.Leuven and 12 polytechnics).

Strategy

(Do not include annual plans.)

• Describe or provide a document describing the current institutional strategy.
• Describe or provide a document describing the current learning and teaching strategy.
• Describe or provide a document describing the current e-learning strategy.

Do not include or refer to annual plans except as necessary to provide budgetary information.

• What is the percentage of students (a) taking courses wholly or largely delivered by e-learning (b) taking courses where the amount of institutionally supplied/guided e-learning is "significant" (i.e. has an impact on staff or students) and (c) taking courses where the where the amount of institutionally supplied/guided e-learning is insignificant? In each case comment on the answer.
• Give the percentage of the institutional budget that e-learning represents. Comment on how it is measured including the assumptions made, whether it is appropriate and any trends.
• Categorise the role (if any) of external funding in fostering the development of e-learning as (a) not relevant, (b) useful, or (c) essential. Comment on the choice.

Structure

• Describe the institutional structure, preferably supplying an organogram.
• Classify the e-learning support model as (a) hub (b) distributed (c) hub and spokes (d) complicated (e) non-existent. Comment on the choice.
• Describe in more detail the structure for the e-learning operation and how it maps into the institutional structure.
• Describe the committees that oversee e-learning (including the rank and role of the Chair in each relevant committee) and their relationship to the organisational structure.

Learning and Teaching processes

This has a focus on learning and teaching with other aspects viewed from this perspective.

Learning and teaching design and delivery

• Describe how choice of pedagogies and technologies is made for a typical programme that is envisaged to include significant e-learning.
• Describe what scope staff have at delivery stage to refine or in some cases override design decisions made earlier.

Learning and teaching development

This includes materials and IPR.

• How much e-learning content is sourced from outside the institution? Use a scale of 1-5 with a comment (an exact percentage is useful).
• Of all e-learning content sourced from outside the institution, what fraction is OER? Use a scale of 1-5 with a comment.
• When staff in the institution develop content, is the content (a) owned by them and licensed to the institution, (b) owned by the institution but with some licensing back to staff, (c) owned by the institution but with no licensing back to staff, (d) unclear or disputed IPR position? Whatever option is chosen, provide a narrative describing the situation in more detail.
• When content is sourced for a programme within the institution, how much is sourced from other departments within the institution? Use a scale of 1-5 with a comment (an exact percentage is useful).
• What is the role of student-generated content in the institution's programmes? Use a scale of 1-5 with a comment.

Learning and teaching evaluation and quality

• Describe the quality procedures (a) in general terms and (b) with respect to e-learning.
• Describe the approach to evaluation of programmes (a) in general terms and (b) where such programmes have significant e-learning components.

Meta Learning and Teaching processes

Communications

• Describe how the institution communicates good practice in e-learning within itself, focussing on communications across internal boundaries.
• Describe how the institution communicates its good practice in e-learning to organisations outside.
• Describe how the institution communicates good practice in e-learning from outside organisations into its own organisation.
• Describe recent occasions on which institutional leaders or managers have made presentations with significant reference to e-learning.

Value for money

• Describe the annual planning procedure (a) in general and (b) how it handles e-learning aspects.
• Describe the decision-making process for a typical academic programme, with particular reference to how e-learning aspects are handled.
• Describe the decision-making process for a typical large IT project such as selection and installation of a new VLE.
• Describe the approach to budget management with particular reference to the staff versus non-staff issues in budgeting for e-learning.
• Describe the procedures in the institution for assigning or negotiating teaching workload to/with staff, taking account of non-traditional styles of teaching as well as classroom teaching and taking specific account of e-learning.

Staff

Teachers, lecturers, trainers and equivalent support roles

• Describe the approach to development of e-learning technical and pedagogic skills among staff, taking account of the different needs of different categories of staff. Set this within the context of staff development generally.
• Describe (a) the current level of staff competence in e-learning and (b) the expected level of staff competence in five years time. In each case use a 1-5 scale with a comment.
• Describe the extent to which staff attitudes to e-learning are favourable or not. Use a 1-5 scale with a comment.
• Describe the way that the institution rewards and recognises staff with competence in e-learning, in (a) monetary and (b) non-monetary terms.

Management and leadership

This subsection concerns leaders (Rectors, Vice-Chancellors, etc) and academic and support service managers (Deans, Directors, etc). These do not need to have specific knowledge of e-learning details but must have the necessary strategic, management, costing and foresight capability to preside over decisions on key e-learning issues such as procurement of a new VLE, development of a new distance learning programme, rebalancing the library and its staff more towards web 2.0 and less to books, etc. This will require appropriate manager and leader training.

• Describe the approach to development of e-learning-related skills among (a) managers and (b) leaders.
• Describe the current level of (a) management and (b) leadership competence in e-learning related skills appropriate to their levels. In each case use a 1-5 scale with a comment.
• Describe the extent to which (a) management and (b) leadership attitudes to e-learning are favourable or not. Use a 1-5 scale with a comment.
• Give details of the job description of the most senior manager/leader in the organisation who spends a significant portion of his/her time on e-learning matters (e.g. the Director of E-Learning).

Students

• Describe the approach to development of e-learning skills among students, taking account of the different needs of different categories of students. Set this within the context of students' more general information literacy and communication skills.
• Describe (a) the current level of student competence in e-learning on entry to the institution and (b) the expected level of student competence on graduation from the institution. In each case use a 1-5 scale with a comment.
• Describe the extent to which student attitudes to e-learning are favourable or not. Use a 1-5 scale with a comment.
• Describe the extent to which students understand the demands on them placed by e-learning systems (e.g. for assignment handling).
• Describe the current approach to handling student plagiarism, both prevention strategies and detection strategies.
• Describe the current (i.e. at last survey) level of student satisfaction with the e-learning aspects of their courses. Use a 1-5 scale with a comment.

Technology

For each of the following technologies relevant to e-learning describe how much it is used on a scale of 1-5 and add a comment if appropriate.

• VLE and/or content repository
• email or bulletin boards
• automated assessment
• Web 2.0 tools especially blogs, wikis and social networks oriented to the institution
• e-portfolios
• laptops - and comment on student ownership issues
• audio or video podcasting or streaming - and comment on student ownership issues
• mobile devices (not laptops) - and comment on student ownership issues

And finally:

• Provide a description of any other technologies with significant use in the institution.

Futures

• Describe the expected changes as they relate to e-learning within the institution's current strategic horizon (from the institution's strategy documents).
• Describe any changes further downstream that the institution is now considering or concerned about.
• Describe how the institution handles the foresight aspects of its operation with regard to e-learning.
• Describe how the institution handles advanced development oriented to e-learning (e.g. by a "sandbox" lab, innovation centre, etc).
• Describe how the institution analyses and takes into account present and future markets for its offerings.
• Describe how the institution analyses and takes into account present and future competitor suppliers for its offerings.
• Describe how the institution analyses and takes into account the views of other stakeholders, including but not restricted to employers, local authorities and the social partners (unions).

References and reports

Add what you can.

---

> Country

> Programmes
>> Case studies