1. Istanbul University, Department of Economics BEYAZIT-FATIH ISTANBUL
A model proposal for new generation university in the light of digitalized society: The Case of Turkish University System
Prof. Dr. Metin TOPRAK
Istanbul University, Department of Economics
BEYAZIT-FATIH ISTANBUL

2. New Turkey – New CoHE- New University
The President uses “The New Turkey”
The President of CoHE uses “The New CoHE” in official documents
This means;
We need
“the new university model” 

3. The New System: After June 24, 2018 (Parliament & Presidency Election)16 9 4
Directorates / Presidencies:
organizational institutions (4)
boards (4)

4. Martyrs monument (July 15 coup d'etat): the new system

5. a view from the new presidential compound: the new system

7. Motivation Turkey is still a candidate to the EU.
The items in the EU higher education reform agenda are obligatory also for Turkey.
A model developed here is in line with the reform agenda of the EU.

8. (Foundation University)
New University Model
(Foundation University)
21st century skills
Interactive
Active participation
Corporate governance principles

9. Policy development and implementation offices
(i) Strategy Development, Standards and Quality Assurance Office (ii) International Relations Office (iii) Project Development and Management Office (iv) Technology Transfer Office (v) Career Planning and On-the-Job Training Office (vi) Office of the Business World and Alumni Relations (vii) Entrepreneurship and Leadership Office (viii) New Jobs and New Skills Office (ix) Lifelong Learning Office (x) Internal Control and Internal Audit Office

10. Committees / Boards (affiliated to related offices and bodies)
University ecosystem consultation and orientation board
Executive committee (Rector’s Office)
Committee for the recognition and transfer of prior learning
Learning management systems committee
Coop-education committee
Professional / vocational qualifications committee
Foreign language committee
Individual learning support committee
Entrepreneurship and leadership committee
Joint degree programs committee
Scholarship students committee
Student council
Student clubs
Curriculum committee
Research and project steering committee
Research, project, publication and social activity promotion committee
Committee for the appointment and promotion of academic staff
Academic staff performance evaluation committee
Equality of opportunity and ethics affairs board
Human resources committee
Administrative staff appointment and promotion committee
Administrative staff performance evaluation committee
Application and complaint monitoring committee
Website monitoring committee
Committee on business development and cooperation with stakeholders
Committee of clusters
Digital agenda committee
European Higher Education Area compliance committee
Quality assurance and accreditation committee
Internal control and internal audit committee
Exchange programs committee
Disadvantages committee
Information management committee

11. New ….
In this study, a model has been developed in order to compensate coordination gaps in the traditional university hierarchical structure, which is designed as department, faculty board, university board and senate: From administration to governance.

12. New ….
Five innovations can be mentioned in terms of organizational and functional configuration of a university model proposed:
Profile of graduate and mission of the new generation university in the fields of education, research and community services,
Policy development and implementation offices,
University ecosystem consultation and steering committee and other committees and boards,
Concept courses and branded courses,
Coop-education and solution partnerships. The design of the Rector's Office is envisaged as an executive committee to prevent coordination gap in the proposed model.

13. New ….
A checklist has been developed for the processing of this model and hence it is made possible to measure the performance of an practice- based university and degree of compatibility with the model.
Thus, the framework and content of the mechanism and tools traditionally used in quality assurance and accreditation will need to be updated in line with this model.

14. Dimensions of governance model of the new generation university
Introduction (motto of the university)
Practice-based education (OJT)
Vision and purpose
Practice-based education model
Profile of graduate
The knowledge, skills and competence dimensions of the curriculum
The ways courses are taught
Qualification information form
University possibilities and capabilities
TR-HE-QF design and practice-based education
Program key learning outcomes (PKLOs)
Relationship between PKLOs and TR-HE-QF
Course learning outcomes (CLOs)
The relationship of CLOs and PKLOs
Compulsory-elective course ratio
Compulsory-elective course design
Design of solution partnership
Concept courses and branded courses ratios
Concept courses design
Design of branded courses
Committees and Boards
Policy development and implementation offices

15. Dimensions of evaluation: Checklist There are different number of items to be evaluated in the following dimensions
University's vision and purpose (criterium to be taken as benchmark).
The consolidated performance of the practice-based education model (summary: 20 dimensions).
Identifying the graduate profile in accordance with practice-based education model (4 profiles).
Dimensioning the curriculum in terms of knowledge, skills and competence (3 dimensions).
The ways courses are taught (6 ways).
Compatibility of practice-based education with the vision and purpose of the university designed in the qualification description form (9 items).
Compatibility of the physical / financial / infrastructure capacity and the academic / researcher capacity of the university with the practice-based education model (5 items).
Compatibility of TR-HE-QF with the practice-based education model (5 items).
Compatibility of program key learning outcomes with the practice- based education model (15 items).
Compatibility of the relationship of PKLOs and TR-HE-QF with the practice-based education model.
Compatibility of CLOs with the practice-based education model (18 items).
Compatibility of the relationship of CLOs and PKLOs with the practice-based education model.
Compatibility of determining of ratios of compulsory and elective courses with the practice-based education model.
Consistency of the relationship of compulsory and elective courses in the context of the practice-based education model (4 items).
Consistency the design and feasibility of solution partnerships within the context of the practice-based education model (7 items).
Proportion of concept courses and branded courses within the curriculum.
Contribution of the concept courses in the format of solution partnerships to the practice-based education model (10 items).
Contribution of the branded courses in the format of solution partnerships to the practice-based education model (19 items).
Contribution of the committees and boards to the practice-based education model (8 items).
Contribution of the policy development and implementation offices to the practice-based education model (8 items).
Contribution of the governance model (organization, coordination and leadership) to the operation of the practice-based education model (20 items).

16. Practice-based education (On-the-job training) model
Criteria for evaluating the design and performance of the concept of practice-based education are: (i) the degree to which the design of the graduate profile allows for the practice-based education model; (ii) the degree to which the compulsory-elective course ratio and its design allow for the practice-based education model; (iii) the degree to which the design of the teaching and learning ways of courses allow for the practice-based education model; (iv) the degree to which the design of the concept and branded courses and form of acquisition of their learning outcomes allow for the practice-based education model; (v) compatibility level of the design of the practice-based education model in the diploma & certificate forms with the vision and aims of the university; (vi) the degree to which the physical, financial and infrastructural facilities of the University permit the practice-based education model; (vii) the degree to which the academic and research staff of the university allow for the practice-based education model; (viii) the degree to which the design of the higher education qualifications framework allows for the practice-based education model; (ix) the degree to which the design of the program key learning outcomes (PKLOs) allows for the practice-based education model; (x) the degree to which the learning outcomes of the courses (LOs) allow for the practice-based education model; (xi) the degree to which the design of the solution partnerships allows for the practice-based education model; (xii) The degree to which the design of the boards and the committees allows for the practice-based education model; (xiii) the degree to which the offices of the policy development and implementation allow for the practice-based education model; (xiv) the degree to which the governance model of the university allows for the practice-based education model.

17. Istanbul University, Department of Economics BEYAZIT-FATIH ISTANBUL
Thank you for your patience!
A model proposal for new generation university in the light of digitalized society: The Case of Turkish University System
Prof. Dr. Metin TOPRAK
Istanbul University, Department of Economics
BEYAZIT-FATIH ISTANBUL