1.1 Effective implementation of the Bethlehem University Five Year Plan will require enhanced organizational structures, systems and relationships to facilitate and promote the new initiatives in policies and programs.

1.2 Much of the formative period of Bethlehem University's structure and administration was in a situation of harassment, obstruction and closure by the Israeli Military Occupation Authorities. This has now been replaced by an enthusiastic Palestinian Ministry of Higher Education with a perspective of overall Palestinian Higher Education and a mandate to develop policy at PNA level.

2 Major Issues Emerging from Responses and Consultation

2.1 Very many respondents said that more democratization and decentralization is required and that all should have a greater consultative role in major decisions (as in the Five Year Planning Process).

2.2 A considerable number of responses called for the employment of more people and for special committees or working teams for what are seen as priority areas, such as research. Participation in initiatives and development programs, such as those of the Five Year Plan and the MOHE Rationalization Plan, unit cost analysis and quality assurance, will demand time and energy.

2.3 Problems of physical accommodations and working space were described as very serious.

2.4 Two areas of student intake policy in which initiatives were said to be needed were easier access for those wishing to enter postgraduate diploma programs and more opportunity for transfer to and from other Palestinian institutions. Policy regarding student numbers was raised as in need of definition.

2.5 The expansion of responsibilities which has occurred at Senior Administrative level without a corresponding increase in personnel was highlighted both directly and indirectly. There is an urgent need to create new positions to relieve pressure on Senior Administrative personnel and to speed up decision making. A reorganization of Senior Administration responsibility is also implied.

2.6 A need for a review of current practices in a number of specific areas emerged:

-procedures for syllabus revision as distinct from curriculum development

-class duration

-student assessment and the current marking system

-inflexibility of teaching schedules

-the length of tenure and the training of Deans and Chairpersons

-the areas of responsibility and power of the Faculties of the University

-a need for continuous strategic planning

-extended hours of access to the University buildings and campus.

2.7 There was little direct reference to the governing structure of Bethlehem University, but there appears to be some confusion about governance and authority inside and outside the University. The value of increased involvement of members of the Board of Trustees was mentioned. Communication and involvement in policy formulation and decisions were issues which emerged from many responses, particularly from within the University.

3 Proposed Initiatives

• Comprehensive analysis of the present organizational structure of the University and the design of a program of development. Consideration of expansion of structures and responsibilities to cover the important areas of strategic planning; research and development; human resource development; and external relations, both international and local.
• A review of the recent expansion of responsibilities and demands on Senior Administrative personnel and the related problem of reduced access and efficiency.
• Establishment of special, and generally time-limited, Committees and Working Teams to provide additional input to the bodies provided for in the statutes of the University.
• Ongoing review of the scope and authority of Faculties and Academic Departments with attention to exploring the devolvement of more responsibilities and a review of how the Academic Bodies of the University can be enabled to work more expeditiously.
• Reference of issues such as distinguishing syllabus revision from curriculum development, the length of classes, the inflexibility of teaching schedules and student assessment and the current marking system to Faculties and Departments for their views, as a matter of urgency.
• Review of the role of non-academic staff members of the University with a view to reorganizing and improving the recognition of their vital contribution to the University's quest for excellence.
• Planning for participation in the initiatives and training programs proposed in the MOHE Rationalization Plan.
• Adoption of a consultative approach to development planning and decision making.
• The extension of access to the campus as part of the University's partnership with the local community.