Brain Korea 21 Phase II

Brain Korea 21 Phase II: A New Evaluation Model

Somi Seong
Steven W. Popper
Charles A. Goldman
David K. Evans
Clifford A. Grammich
Copyright Date: 2008
Edition: 1
Published by: RAND Corporation
Pages: 276
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7249/mg711krf
  • Cite this Item
  • Book Info
    Brain Korea 21 Phase II
    Book Description:

    The Brain Korea 21 Program (BK21), which seeks to make Korean research universities globally competitive and to produce more high-quality researchers in Korea, provides funding to graduate students and professors who belong to research groups at top universities. The authors develop quantitative and qualitative models to evaluate how well BK21 is fulfilling its goals and make suggestions for further stimulating Korean university research.

    eISBN: 978-0-8330-4447-1
    Subjects: Education, Management & Organizational Behavior

Table of Contents

  1. Front Matter
    (pp. i-ii)
  2. Preface
    (pp. iii-iv)
  3. Table of Contents
    (pp. v-x)
  4. Figures
    (pp. xi-xii)
  5. Tables
    (pp. xiii-xiv)
  6. Summary
    (pp. xv-xxiv)
  7. Acknowledgments
    (pp. xxv-xxvi)
  8. Abbreviations
    (pp. xxvii-xxviii)
  9. CHAPTER ONE Introduction
    (pp. 1-8)

    In the late 1990s, the Korea Ministry of Education and Human Resource Development (MoE), in response to concern over the relatively low standing of the nation’s universities and researchers, launched the Brain Korea 21 program (BK21). The program has had two phases so far. In Phase I, from 1999 to 2005, BK21 allocated about US$1.4 billion in funding.¹ In Phase II, which began in 2006 and is scheduled to run through 2012, BK21 will allocate an additional $2.1 billion.

    BK21 seeks to nurture globally competitive research universities and graduate programs and to breed high-quality research manpower in Korea. BK21 funding...

  10. CHAPTER TWO Implications of Phase I Program Evaluations for Phase II Evaluations
    (pp. 9-20)

    In this chapter, we review the findings of Phase I evaluations¹ to derive implications for evaluating Phase II. The purpose of this chapter is not to provide a comprehensive survey of existing evaluations and the associated literature but to extract lessons for designing an evaluation model that can show the net effect of the Phase II program.

    Phase I had two types of evaluations: (1) annual and interim evaluations to assess how each recipient research group was progressing each year and (2) program evaluations to assess the program’s overall effects. We review each of these below.

    Expert panels organized by...

  11. CHAPTER THREE A Logic Model for Evaluating BK21
    (pp. 21-58)

    We begin by developing a logic model to specify the goals and missions, inputs, activities, incentives, outputs, and outcomes of BK21 and the logical linkages among them. This provides a conceptual framework for the quantitative assessment model we discuss in Chapter Four and the evaluation metrics and measures we discuss in Chapter Five.

    In presenting the elements of our logic model, we seek to comprehend the underlying policy intentions, program structure, and dynamics of the program effects. In discussing program goals and missions, we want to identify implicit and explicit program goals by which performance will be evaluated and how...

  12. CHAPTER FOUR Quantitative Model to Assess BK21 Program Outcomes
    (pp. 59-110)

    Our previously presented logic model for BK21 expresses the relationships between inputs, incentives, activities of individuals and institutions, outputs, contextual conditions, and program outcomes. Some of these relationships are easier to measure and test than others. For example, assessing research quantity and even research quality (as measured by means of the reputation of journals in which research is published) is more straightforward than measuring the subjective competitive environment or a university’s prestige (which can take decades to change). Those outputs or outcomes that are difficult to quantify may still be evaluated using other methods, as we explore in Chapter Five....

  13. CHAPTER FIVE Metrics and Measurement for Program Evaluation
    (pp. 111-160)

    A firm embarking on a new business strategy would have a relatively easy time of tracking the success of its effort. It generally possesses a baseline of previous experience and expectations. It knows precisely what steps it has taken and has an implicit model of how those changes should affect existing processes under its control and perhaps, to some extent, important external variables that could affect success. Most importantly, it has available a series of indicators (e.g., return on investment, growth in net income, profit margin, and market share) that are directly related to success or failure and widely understood...

  14. CHAPTER SIX Database Design to Support BK21 Program Evaluation and Measurement
    (pp. 161-176)

    So far, we have explored the goals for BK21 and provided a logic model for understanding its process, a model for determining the net effect of Phase II, and an extensive list of measures by which evaluators may judge its success. In this chapter, we consider how to prioritize candidate evaluation measures and then propose a general database structure for measurement and evaluation, including detailed identification of the necessary data time series and mapping of these series onto the suggested measures.

    In previous chapters, we noted the practical bases for evaluating how well Phase II is fulfilling its goals, and...

  15. CHAPTER SEVEN Future Development of BK21 and University Research in Korea
    (pp. 177-194)

    We now turn to an examination of possible future directions for BK21 and the university research system in Korea. As the sponsor requested, we offer guidance on several topics related to BK21 and the research university system in Korea, including

    concentrating the funding on a limited number of research groups

    using the research group (sa-up-dan) as the unit of support establishing a minimum number of participating professors for a research group

    evaluating methods to determine recipients, including ranking scientific merit

    sub-programs to support professional schools, schools outside Seoul, and research groups smaller than the minimum requirement

    the optimal scale and...

  16. CHAPTER EIGHT Conclusions
    (pp. 195-206)

    The BK21 Phase I program coincided with a period of improvement in the quality and productivity in Korean higher education and research capabilities. Previous evaluations of the Phase I program, however, could not identify the net contributions of Phase I funding to this general trend.

    In this study, we have discussed ways to estimate the net effect of Phase II. We presented a logic model of program goals and missions, including how these are affected by program inputs and in turn affect program outputs; reviewed a quantitative method for identifying the impact of the program; suggested metrics and measures needed...

  17. APPENDIX A Performance Evaluation Metrics Used in Previous Evaluations of Phase I
    (pp. 207-208)
  18. APPENDIX B Interview Guides for Representatives of Participants, Policymakers, and Users Related to the University Research and Education System
    (pp. 209-216)
  19. APPENDIX C Selection Criteria for Applied Science Research Groups: Phase II
    (pp. 217-218)
  20. APPENDIX D Table with Lagged Outcomes
    (pp. 219-220)
  21. APPENDIX E Research Data Series
    (pp. 221-228)
  22. APPENDIX F Education Data Series
    (pp. 229-236)
  23. APPENDIX G Industry Data Series
    (pp. 237-242)
  24. APPENDIX H General Data Series
    (pp. 243-244)
  25. Bibliography
    (pp. 245-248)