1. TLC FINAL REPORT METHODOLOGY Presentation by Dr. Edith Natukunda - Togboa

2. Introduction Universities, like any other organisation, operate in a dynamic environment – both internal, operational and external competitive, evolve with time. In response, management processes must also change over time so that the institution can remain efficient and sustainable through the changing situation. Reengineering and reorganising institutional products, processes and structures is a critical endeavour as management seeks to improve its success rates and optimise university programme cycle time.

3. Conceptual framework A conceptual framework of Reforms at Makerere University was first developed so as to identify the major constructs/ blocks of processes that would go into effecting Research, Admin. & Financial Reforms. This framework was largely based on reform programmes effected in other universities in the region – Univ. of Dar es Salaam, Univ. of Addis Ababa, Univ. of Nairobi.

4. Conceptual Framework Cont. The Conceptual framework of Reforms at Makerere was a performance model that identifies the present processes and measures them against hypothesised more successful ones as a positive drive in search of a better performance, using a cross functional team – the Reform Committee.

5. Mapping of Processes in T &L Identifying of core processes Segement them into sub-processes Multi-valuing of sub-process : where initiated, duration, preconditions, if any. Mapping sub-processes from space A, through other spaces B, C, to …….Z in order to sequence & explore documentation of basic process properties Different documentation features used to distinguish these basic properties e.g design features. Critical examination of current process.

6. Critical Examination of processes A critical appraisal of how we handle core processes of Teaching and Learning at Makere Univ. Based on impirical data on the sequencing of operations at various levels Critiqued redundancies, disconnections, efficiency, effectiveness and relevance of “as is ” operation. With each “no value added” activity identified problematic area though an evaluative phase. Proposed a possible solution including adjustment & omission of components of sub-process for the ideal “to be” operation. (Organisational factors such as context, capacity, structures within sub-units were taken into account).

7. Benchmarking Visits Visits conducted to compare with best practices with the eventual aim of innovative adaptation. To rate our present performance against the continent’s best. To identify critical success factors in T &L prog. devpt. To look at other institutions’ settings, practices, methods and link them to their good performance. Factors like programme synergy, market attractiveness, student screening, market study & priotization criteria were taken note of in ordrer to envision more focused and proficient T &L.

8. Sensitisation and Consultation Public platforms were organised to make others aware and responsive to ideas, events & situations arising fromthe Reform process. Some addressed homogenious groups e.g MPs,, Management, others were crossfunctional (student/ Staff interface) to take care of the diversisty and interdependance of T & L processes ans stgructures.

9. Review of existing literature ; thematically analysed to collect impirical data on Teaching, Learning and College Structures in universities. Collecting such data was aiming at developing an authoritative and factual stance to the process. Documentary Review

10. Focus Group Discussions Group interviews that captilised on communication between reform process participants. This method was useful because it explored people’s knowledge and experiences. Through it we examined not only what people were thinking but also how and why they were thinking that way. FGDs were especially helpful in tapping into a variety of views on College formation.

11. References Denscombe Martyn : The Good Research Guide, Maidenhead Open UniversityPress, 3 rd Edition, 2007. Jackson N. & Lund H. (Eds) : Benchmarking for Higher Education,Taylor & Francis Inc., U.K, 2000.