Business intelligence (BI) systems have been widely recognized as a leading technology for many years. However, despite the high priority and importance placed on BI, there has been a significant lack of BI system implementation (BISI) success. BI systems are not considered to be conventional information systems (IS) and often rely on the integration of a complex information infrastructure. Consequently, the degree of information quality (IQ) and system quality (SQ) have not met expectations for BISI success. This study was designed to determine how an organization may gain benefits in the context of BISI by uncovering the antecedents and critical value factors (CVFs) of SQ and IQ necessary to derive greater BISI success. In phase one, a list of BISI SQ and IQ characteristics were collected through literature discovery and an open-ended questionnaire delivered to a group of BI user experts. The collected items were grouped and categorized based on their similarities. In phase two of the study 257 survey responses were collected from BI users to measure the level of importance, i.e. value, they placed on SQ and IQ characteristics. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) via principal component analysis (PCA) was then used to uncover the CVFs of SQ and IQ that influence BISI success. Two highly reliable CVFs for SQ of BISI with a cumulative variance of nearly 62% and three highly reliable CVFs for IQ of BISI with a cumulative variance of over 75% were subsequently identified. In phase three of the study, an extended conceptual model for IS success was validated to assess the uncovered CVFs of SQ and IQ, as well as their influence on the constructs of perceived SQ of BISI and perceived IQ of BISI. Employing partial least squares (PLS), a subset of structural equation modeling (SEM), the research model was then used to assess the dimensions of perceived SQ of BISI and perceived IQ of BISI as antecedents of the constructs of perceived user systems satisfaction and perceived user information satisfaction from BISI. The crossover effects of perceived user systems and information satisfaction from BISI were also analyzed. The results identified two SQ CVFs of BISI (integration flexibility SQ and reliability SQ) that demonstrated a significant positive impact on perceived SQ for BISI as well as three IQ CVFs of BISI (representation IQ, intrinsic IQ, and accessibility IQ) that had a significant positive impact on perceived IQ of BISI. The constructs of perceived user systems satisfaction and perceived user information satisfaction from BISI had explained variances of R2 = .576 and .589 respectively. Additionally, 12 items of SQ for BISI and 14 items of IQ for BISI were identified as possessing high reliability. This study makes two important contributions to the IS body of knowledge. First, it investigated the universal set of antecedents of SQ and IQ to establish the CVFs of IQ (integration flexibility SQ and reliability SQ) as well as the CVFs of IQ (representation IQ, intrinsic IQ, and accessibility IQ) for BISI success. Second, this study evaluated the crossover effects of system and information satisfaction in BISI success highlighting the importance that BI users place on the need to distinguish between the BI system, the IQ of the output produced, and the influence of IQ on perceived user system satisfaction from BISI. This study benefits stakeholders by focusing on what is important to BISI success and identifies those areas that are most likely to lead to better use of scarce resources while providing the greatest benefits.

This research focuses on the data quality control methods for evaluating the performance of Weigh-In-Motion (WIM) systems on Oregon highways. This research identifies and develops a new methodology and algorithm to explore the accuracy of each station's weight and spacing data at a corridor level, and further implements the Statistical Process Control (SPC) method, finite mixture model, axle spacing error rating method, and data flag method in published research to examine the soundness of WIM systems. This research employs the historical WIM data to analyze sensor health and compares the evaluation results of the methods. The results suggest the new triangulation method identified most possible WIM malfunctions that other methods sensed, and this method unprecedentedly monitors the process behavior with controls of time and meteorological variables. The SPC method appeared superior in differentiating between sensor noises and sensor errors or drifts, but it drew wrong conclusions when accurate WIM data reference was absent. The axle spacing error rating method cannot check the essential weight data in special cases, but reliable loop sensor evaluation results were arrived at by employing this multiple linear regression model. The results of the data flag method and the finite mixed model results were not accurate, thus they could be used as additional tools to complement the data quality evaluation results. Overall, these data quality analysis results are the valuable sources for examining the early detection of system malfunctions, sensor drift, etc., and allow the WIM operators to correct the situation on time before large amounts of measurement are lost.

Abstract not available

This thesis proposes, analyses and implements a fast and accurate real-time power system disturbances identification method based on an enhanced linear least squares algorithm for mitigation and monitoring of various power quality problems such as current harmonics, grid unbalances and voltage dips. The enhanced algorithm imposes less real-time computational burden on processing the system and is thus called ???efficient least squares algorithm???. The proposed efficient least squares algorithm does not require matrix inversion operation and contains only real numbers. The number of required real-time matrix multiplications is also reduced in the proposed method by pre-performing some of the matrix multiplications to form a constant matrix. The proposed efficient least squares algorithm extracts instantaneous sine and cosine terms of the fundamental and harmonic components by simply multiplying a set of sampled input data by the pre-calculated constant matrix. A power signal processing system based on the proposed efficient least squares algorithm is presented in this thesis. This power signal processing system derives various power system quantities that are used for real-time monitoring and disturbance mitigation. These power system quantities include constituent components, symmetrical components and various power measurements. The properties of the proposed power signal processing system was studied using modelling and practical implementation in a digital signal processor. These studies demonstrated that the proposed method is capable of extracting time varying power system quantities quickly and accurately. The dynamic response time of the proposed method was less than half that of a fundamental cycle. Moreover, the proposed method showed less sensitivity to noise pollution and small variations in fundamental frequency. The performance of the proposed power signal processing system was compared to that of the popular DFT/FFT methods using computer simulations. The simulation results confirmed the superior performance of the proposed method under both transient and steady-state conditions. In order to investigate the practicability of the method, the proposed power signal processing system was applied to two real-life disturbance mitigation applications namely, an active power filter (APF) and a distribution synchronous static compensator (D-STATCOM). The validity and performance of the proposed signal processing system in both disturbance mitigations applications were investigated by simulation and experimental studies. The extensive modelling and experimental studies confirmed that the proposed signal processing system can be used for practical real-time applications which require fast disturbance identification such as mitigation control and power quality monitoring of power systems

University of Macau / Faculty of Science and Technology / Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering

No description available.

This research work deals with the application of the phase shifting transformer in improving the steady state performance and voltage stability of transmission network that has transmission lines at different voltage levels running in parallel to each other. Transmission power system networks are usually developed using lines built at a certain voltage level initially. As power demand requirements increase, building of the new lines at the same voltage level becomes necessary. However, lesser and lesser improvements in transfer capacity are realised when the additional lines are built. This prompts utilities to consider higher voltages for future lines as these have a higher transfer capacity. Utilities usually lay, i.e., they build in parallel, newer, higher voltage transmission lines along side the existing lower voltage ones. Power flow in power system is mainly influenced by impedances of equipment. If the combined impedance of the existing, lower voltage transmission system is relatively less than the impedance of the newer, higher voltage ones, power may primarily flow through it rather than via the newer, parallel higher voltage transmission network. This may lead to a serious underutilisation of the newer infrastructure with a higher transmission capacity. Transmission networks similar to the one described above are common throughout the world. This study was undertaken towards finding solutions to the problem of under utilisation of such transmission lines. The study was performed by first reviewing the literature on the use of phase shifting transformers to redirect power flow in transmission networks throughout the world. This was followed by analysis of the theory on how and what determines the power flow in power networks. Several simulations of varying the phase of the phase shifting transformer were performed on the Cape network, as a case study, to investigate the impact on the power flow distribution and voltage stability performance of the 765 kV and 400 kV transmission lines carrying power to the Western Cape. In this dissertation, it has been demonstrated that a phase shifting transformer can be used to alter the power flow patterns so that power flows are restructured or redistributed, such that power which originally flowed via the low impedance, lower voltage system is transferred to the parallel higher voltage transmission system of lines. It is shown that once the power flows are redistributed, steady state and voltage stability performance of the total system can be enhanced and an increase in its power transfer capacity can be realised. / Thesis (M.Sc.Eng.)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, 2011.

This thesis proposes, analyses and implements a fast and accurate real-time power system disturbances identification method based on an enhanced linear least squares algorithm for mitigation and monitoring of various power quality problems such as current harmonics, grid unbalances and voltage dips. The enhanced algorithm imposes less real-time computational burden on processing the system and is thus called ???efficient least squares algorithm???. The proposed efficient least squares algorithm does not require matrix inversion operation and contains only real numbers. The number of required real-time matrix multiplications is also reduced in the proposed method by pre-performing some of the matrix multiplications to form a constant matrix. The proposed efficient least squares algorithm extracts instantaneous sine and cosine terms of the fundamental and harmonic components by simply multiplying a set of sampled input data by the pre-calculated constant matrix. A power signal processing system based on the proposed efficient least squares algorithm is presented in this thesis. This power signal processing system derives various power system quantities that are used for real-time monitoring and disturbance mitigation. These power system quantities include constituent components, symmetrical components and various power measurements. The properties of the proposed power signal processing system was studied using modelling and practical implementation in a digital signal processor. These studies demonstrated that the proposed method is capable of extracting time varying power system quantities quickly and accurately. The dynamic response time of the proposed method was less than half that of a fundamental cycle. Moreover, the proposed method showed less sensitivity to noise pollution and small variations in fundamental frequency. The performance of the proposed power signal processing system was compared to that of the popular DFT/FFT methods using computer simulations. The simulation results confirmed the superior performance of the proposed method under both transient and steady-state conditions. In order to investigate the practicability of the method, the proposed power signal processing system was applied to two real-life disturbance mitigation applications namely, an active power filter (APF) and a distribution synchronous static compensator (D-STATCOM). The validity and performance of the proposed signal processing system in both disturbance mitigations applications were investigated by simulation and experimental studies. The extensive modelling and experimental studies confirmed that the proposed signal processing system can be used for practical real-time applications which require fast disturbance identification such as mitigation control and power quality monitoring of power systems

25 Jahre nach dem Zusammenbruch der Sowjetunion sind aus einem unitären Hochschulsystem 15 einzigartige nationale Systeme hervorgegangen. Deren Entwicklung wurde von je eigenen ökonomischen, kulturellen und politischen Kräften beeinflusst und geprägt, sowohl nationalen wie internationalen Ursprungs (Johnstone and Bain 2002). Die vorliegende Doktorarbeit untersucht die Veränderungen der Governance von Hochschulsystemen der drei postsowjetischen Staaten Russland, Kasachstan und Moldau über den Zeitraum von 1991 bis 2015, analysiert, zu welchem Grad diese Entwicklungen einem Prozess der Konvergenz hin zu einem „globalen Modell“ oder einem „postsowjetischen Modell“ folgen und formuliert Hypothesen über die treibenden Kräfte und Pfadabhängigkeiten, welche auf nationalem, regionalen und globaler Ebene diese Entwicklungen befördert, gehemmt oder auf idiosynkratische Art und Weise geprägt haben. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass global propagierte Governanceinstrumente – wie z.B. Globalbudgets, erweiterte Befugnisse der Hochschulleitung, externe Qualitätssicherung, Stakeholdergovernancegremien – in allen drei untersuchten Ländern Verbreitung finden und ein Prozess der Konvergenz hin zu einem „global Modell“ der Hochschulgovernance stattfindet. Gleichzeitig zeigen die Ergebnisse, dass die spezifischen Eigenarten der nationalen Governancearrangements durch die Einführung dieser neuen Instrumente in der Regel nicht ersetzt werden und dem Bestehenden stattdessen als zusätzliche Ebenen hinzugefügt werden. Wo die Logiken der neuen mit den alten Strukturen kollidieren, zeigt sich, dass sich die tradierten Strukturen und Prozesse in der Regel durchsetzen. Zudem zeigt sich, dass die Governancearrangements der drei untersuchten Länder eine große Zahl spezieller Eigenschaften teilen, durch die sie sich systematisch von jenem propagierten globalen Modell abheben. Jenes „Postsowjetische Modell“ der Hochschulgovernance zeichnet sich durch dominante Rolle des Staates, Hierarchie als primäre und legitime Form der Governance sowie einen geringen Grad an Vertrauen zwischen den zentralen Akteuren des Hochschulsystems aus. Zuletzt illustriert die Dissertation die Divergenzen und Besonderheiten der Governancemodelle in Russland, Kasachstan und Moldau. Die vorliegende Dissertation leistet somit einen Beitrag zum Verständnis der Entwicklung der Governance der Hochschulsysteme in einer sich dynamisch entwickelten Weltregion, welche in der akademischen Literatur bislang nur wenig Aufmerksamkeit erhalten hat.:Table of Contents Table of Figures ............................................................................................................................. 5 Preliminary remarks and acknowledgements .................................................................................. 6 Glossary ........................................................................................................................................... 8 1 Abstract ........................................................................................................................................ 11 2 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 13 2.1 Research Topic ...................................................................................................................... 13 2.2 Starting point and personal research interest ......................................................................... 14 2.3 Research approach ................................................................................................................. 15 2.4 Relevance to research and practice ........................................................................................ 16 2.5 Structure ................................................................................................................................ 16 3 Steps towards a framework of analysis ........................................................................................ 17 3.1 The Governance of Higher Education Systems ..................................................................... 17 3.1.1 Higher Education systems ............................................................................................. 17 3.1.2 Governance in higher education .................................................................................... 23 3.1.3 Summary: Making sense of higher education governance ............................................ 32 3.2 The changing governance of higher education systems ........................................................ 33 3.2.1 Conceptualizing forces of change in the governance of higher education systems: The ‘Glonacal’ agency heuristic ........................................................................................................... 33 3.2.2 Global trends and the emergence of a “global model” of higher education governance36 3.2.3 Instruments of Governance of Higher Education Systems ............................................ 49 3.2.4 Conclusion: A global model of HE governance? .......................................................... 66 3.3 State of research on the governance of higher education in post-Soviet countries ............... 67 3.3.1 European Integration in the post-Soviet space .............................................................. 70 4 Framework of Analysis and Research Design .............................................................................. 73 4.1 Research Questions and Scope of Analysis ........................................................................... 73 4.2 Research Methodology, Case Study Design, and Data Collection ........................................ 74 4.2.1 Case Studies and data collection ................................................................................... 74 4.2.2 Comparing the governance of higher education systems and assessing convergence .. 77 4.2.3 Discussion of validity and reliability of the chosen case study design .......................... 78 4.3 Limitations of the study ......................................................................................................... 79 5 The Point of Departure: The Soviet Union ................................................................................... 80 5.1 Introduction - Key features of the Soviet Higher Education system ..................................... 80 5.2 Structure of the HE system .................................................................................................... 83 5.3 The governance of higher education in the Soviet Union ..................................................... 85 5.3.1 Actors and their capabilities .......................................................................................... 85 5.3.2 Educational Standards and Quality Assurance .............................................................. 86 page 3 5.3.3 Regulation of admission into higher education ............................................................. 88 5.3.4 Institutional governance, decision-making and institutional autonomy ........................ 89 5.3.5 Financing of HEIs.......................................................................................................... 90 5.4 The HE Reforms of 1987 ...................................................................................................... 91 5.5 The break-up and transition of the Soviet higher education system ...................................... 94 6 The Russian Federation ................................................................................................................ 99 6.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 99 6.2 The development of the governance of the higher education system in Russia .................... 99 6.2.1 De-regulation and marketization of higher education (1991-2000) ............................ 100 6.2.2 Renaissance of state control, internationalization and renewed investment into higher education (2000-2004) ................................................................................................................ 105 6.2.3 Asserting state control and promoting differentiation of the higher education system (2004-2012) ................................................................................................................................. 110 6.2.4 Differentiated state steering (2012-2016) .................................................................... 119 6.3 The governance model of the Russian HE system by 2015 ................................................ 128 7 The Republic of Kazakhstan ........................................................................................................ 134 7.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 134 7.2 The development of the governance of the higher education system in Kazakhstan .......... 135 7.2.1 Establishing statehood and institutions (1991-1999) ................................................... 136 7.2.2 Curbing corruption and saddling the market (1999-2004) .......................................... 139 7.2.3 Preparing to join the Bologna Space (2005-2010) ...................................................... 146 7.2.4 Differentiation and expanding autonomy (2011-2017) ............................................... 153 7.3 The governance model of the Kazakh HE system by 2015 ................................................. 171 8 The Republic of Moldova ............................................................................................................. 173 8.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 173 8.2 The development of the governance of the higher education system in Moldova .............. 176 8.2.1 Experimentation and laisser-faire after independence (1991-1994) ............................ 177 8.2.2 Attempts to establish impartial instruments to regulate quality (1994-2001) ............. 178 8.2.3 Re-Centralization of powers in the Ministry of Education (2001-2006) ..................... 181 8.2.4 Creation of dysfunctional public structures (2006-2009) ............................................ 183 8.2.5 The long struggle for a new system of governance (2009-2015) ................................ 184 8.3 The governance model of the Moldovan HE system by 2015 ............................................ 194 9 Cross-National Comparison of Developments and Discussion of Results ................................... 197 9.1 How has the governance of higher education systems changed between 1991-2015? ....... 197 9.1.1 Common challenges and similar answers .................................................................... 197 9.1.2 Diverging paths ........................................................................................................... 200 9.1.3 Two-track state steering system in Russia ................................................................... 203 9.1.4 Marketization and expanding state-overseen stakeholder governance in Kazakhstan 205 page 4 9.1.5 Imitation of “European” institutions in Moldova ........................................................ 207 9.2 Is there a convergence towards a “post-Soviet” or global model of governance of higher education systems? .......................................................................................................................... 208 9.2.1 Quality Assurance ....................................................................................................... 208 9.2.2 Institutional Governance and University Autonomy ................................................... 210 9.2.3 Regulation of access .................................................................................................... 211 9.2.4 Financing ..................................................................................................................... 212 9.2.5 Conclusion: Is there a common model of governance? ............................................... 213 9.3 The interplay of national, regional and global factors on the development of the governance of higher education .......................................................................................................................... 218 9.3.1 Global and European forces ........................................................................................ 218 9.3.2 Regional forces ............................................................................................................ 224 9.3.3 National-level: Governments and Ministries responsible for higher education .......... 225 9.3.4 National-level: Stakeholder organizations................................................................... 232 9.3.5 National-level: Higher Education Institutions ............................................................. 234 9.3.6 National-level: Institutional factors of path dependence ............................................. 235 10 Discussion and Outlook .............................................................................................................. 244 10.1 Concluding reflections on the contribution of this study to the field of research ................ 246 11 References .................................................................................................................................. 247 12 Annexes ...................................................................................................................................... 269 12.1 Annex 1: Russia - The governance of the higher education system .................................... 269 12.1.1 Russia: Structure of the higher education system ........................................................ 269 12.1.2 Actors and their capabilities ........................................................................................ 273 12.1.3 Instruments of higher education governance in Russia ............................................... 283 12.1.4 Competitive programs for investment and differentiation of higher education........... 295 12.2 Annex 2: Kazakhstan – The governance of the higher education system ........................... 299 12.2.1 Kazakhstan: Structure of the higher education system ................................................ 299 12.2.2 Actors and their capabilities ........................................................................................ 302 12.2.3 Instruments of higher education governance in Kazakhstan ....................................... 310 12.3 Annex 3: Moldova – The governance of the higher education system ............................... 322 12.3.1 Moldova: Structure of the higher education system .................................................... 322 12.3.2 Actors and their capabilities ........................................................................................ 325 12.3.3 Instruments of higher education governance in Moldova ........................................... 328 12.4 Annex 4: The European “infrastructure” of quality assurance ............................................ 336 / After 25 years of transformations of higher education systems in post-Soviet countries, the single Soviet model of higher education has evolved into fifteen unique national systems, shaped by economic, cul-tural, and political forces, both national and global (Johnstone and Bain 2002). International agencies such as the World Bank and the OECD have lobbied for a set of policies associated with the Washington Consensus (Neave, G. R. & van Vught, 1991). The Bologna Process has created isomorphic pressures, supported by EU policies and funding. Many post-Soviet States have responded to these influences, albeit with different motivations and unclear outcomes (Tomusk, 2011). Comparative research on these developments, however, is scarce and has primarily discussed them in terms of decentralization, mar-ketization and institutional autonomy (Heyneman 2010; Silova, 2011). This PhD thesis aims to 1) reconstruct the developments of governance of higher education systems, 2) analyze to what degree the developments represent a convergence towards a “global model” or a “Post-Soviet model” and 3) formulate hypotheses about driving forces and path dependencies at national, regional and global level which have driven or impeded these changes. Following work by Becher & Kogan (1992), Clark (1983), Jongbloed (2003), Paradeise (2009); Hood (2004); Dill (2010) and Dobbins et al. (2011), the research analyzes the object of analysis, the govern-ance of higher education systems, on five dimensions: 1. Educational Standards, quality assessment, and information provision; 2. Regulation of admissions to higher education; 3. Institutional structures, decision-making, and autonomy; 4. Higher education financing and incentive structures; and 5. The relationship of higher education and the state. Explanatory approaches draw upon perspectives of path dependence and models of institutional change drawing on work by North (1990), Steinmo (1992), Weick (1976), Pierson (2000) and Witte (2006). Three post-Soviet, non-EU, Bologna signatory states were selected to represent a diverse geographical sub-sample of the 15 post-Soviet States. The three countries studied in-depth are Russia, Moldova and Kazakhstan. The period of analysis comprises the changes taking place over a 25-year period between 1991 and 2015. Methodologically, the study rests on extensive literature analysis of previous academic publications, reports by international organizations such as the World Bank, OECD, and the EU, and national strategy papers. Building on this document analysis, over 60 semi-structured expert interviews were conducted with representatives of State organizations, HEIs and other stakeholder groups engaged in the govern-ance of higher education. The outcomes of interviews were used to situate developments in the particular page 12 social-political and societal contexts and to triangulate policy documents with various stakeholder per-spectives, in order to reconstruct how and why specific policy changes came about, were implemented or abandoned. The results show a differentiated picture: The governance instruments promoted by OECD, WB and EU are clearly recognizable in the 2015 governance arrangements in all three case countries. On this instru-ments-level “surface”, a process of convergence towards the “global model” is clearly taking place. While these new instruments are being adopted, however, the specific national governance arrangements persist and continue to matter. Only in isolated instances are old instruments fully displaced. More com-monly, new structures are added as additional layers to existing governance arrangements. The three countries continue to share a number of unique characteristics which sets them apart from the Anglo-Saxon higher education systems, which have inspired the “global model”. The dominating con-trolling role of the state has remained in place in all countries. This is strongly reinforced by national-level institutions and mental models which affirm hierarchy as the legitimate principle in governance and a lack of trust between actors in the system. In all case countries, the mutual expectation of state and HEIs alike remains that the state should be steering the higher education sector. This it does (Russia and Kazakhstan) or attempts to do (Moldova). Clearly, the adoption of governance instruments which are inspired by the “global model” does in no way equate with a retreat of the state. While the elements of university autonomy and stakeholder governance are slowly expanded, even this very process of loosening the reigns of the state is in great measure overseen and steered by the state. Shared character-istics, such as centralized control over admission; a state claim to steer and, in many cases, control the system; a hierarchical, authoritarian, personalized style of governance, management, leadership, as well as accountability form the discernable core of a common “post-Soviet” model of HE governance. The shared institutional past of the Soviet era, as well as common challenges, have facilitated and maintained these commonalities. As time passes, however, these post-Soviet commonalities are getting weaker. Divergent national-level forces and actors are driving or impeding reforms: While in Moldova, political volatility and underfund-ing have repeatedly undermined substantial reforms, Russia and Kazakhstan have each adopted govern-ance and management practices from New Public Management in new idiosyncratic ways: Kazakhstan has embarked on an authoritarian-driven decentralization program. Russia has created a two-tier system of state steering through financial incentivization and evaluation on the one hand, and tight oversight, control and intervention on the other. This dissertation sheds light on the developments, driving forces and mechanisms behind the convergence and divergence of approaches to higher education governance in an under-studied region of the world.:Table of Contents Table of Figures ............................................................................................................................. 5 Preliminary remarks and acknowledgements .................................................................................. 6 Glossary ........................................................................................................................................... 8 1 Abstract ........................................................................................................................................ 11 2 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 13 2.1 Research Topic ...................................................................................................................... 13 2.2 Starting point and personal research interest ......................................................................... 14 2.3 Research approach ................................................................................................................. 15 2.4 Relevance to research and practice ........................................................................................ 16 2.5 Structure ................................................................................................................................ 16 3 Steps towards a framework of analysis ........................................................................................ 17 3.1 The Governance of Higher Education Systems ..................................................................... 17 3.1.1 Higher Education systems ............................................................................................. 17 3.1.2 Governance in higher education .................................................................................... 23 3.1.3 Summary: Making sense of higher education governance ............................................ 32 3.2 The changing governance of higher education systems ........................................................ 33 3.2.1 Conceptualizing forces of change in the governance of higher education systems: The ‘Glonacal’ agency heuristic ........................................................................................................... 33 3.2.2 Global trends and the emergence of a “global model” of higher education governance36 3.2.3 Instruments of Governance of Higher Education Systems ............................................ 49 3.2.4 Conclusion: A global model of HE governance? .......................................................... 66 3.3 State of research on the governance of higher education in post-Soviet countries ............... 67 3.3.1 European Integration in the post-Soviet space .............................................................. 70 4 Framework of Analysis and Research Design .............................................................................. 73 4.1 Research Questions and Scope of Analysis ........................................................................... 73 4.2 Research Methodology, Case Study Design, and Data Collection ........................................ 74 4.2.1 Case Studies and data collection ................................................................................... 74 4.2.2 Comparing the governance of higher education systems and assessing convergence .. 77 4.2.3 Discussion of validity and reliability of the chosen case study design .......................... 78 4.3 Limitations of the study ......................................................................................................... 79 5 The Point of Departure: The Soviet Union ................................................................................... 80 5.1 Introduction - Key features of the Soviet Higher Education system ..................................... 80 5.2 Structure of the HE system .................................................................................................... 83 5.3 The governance of higher education in the Soviet Union ..................................................... 85 5.3.1 Actors and their capabilities .......................................................................................... 85 5.3.2 Educational Standards and Quality Assurance .............................................................. 86 page 3 5.3.3 Regulation of admission into higher education ............................................................. 88 5.3.4 Institutional governance, decision-making and institutional autonomy ........................ 89 5.3.5 Financing of HEIs.......................................................................................................... 90 5.4 The HE Reforms of 1987 ...................................................................................................... 91 5.5 The break-up and transition of the Soviet higher education system ...................................... 94 6 The Russian Federation ................................................................................................................ 99 6.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 99 6.2 The development of the governance of the higher education system in Russia .................... 99 6.2.1 De-regulation and marketization of higher education (1991-2000) ............................ 100 6.2.2 Renaissance of state control, internationalization and renewed investment into higher education (2000-2004) ................................................................................................................ 105 6.2.3 Asserting state control and promoting differentiation of the higher education system (2004-2012) ................................................................................................................................. 110 6.2.4 Differentiated state steering (2012-2016) .................................................................... 119 6.3 The governance model of the Russian HE system by 2015 ................................................ 128 7 The Republic of Kazakhstan ........................................................................................................ 134 7.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 134 7.2 The development of the governance of the higher education system in Kazakhstan .......... 135 7.2.1 Establishing statehood and institutions (1991-1999) ................................................... 136 7.2.2 Curbing corruption and saddling the market (1999-2004) .......................................... 139 7.2.3 Preparing to join the Bologna Space (2005-2010) ...................................................... 146 7.2.4 Differentiation and expanding autonomy (2011-2017) ............................................... 153 7.3 The governance model of the Kazakh HE system by 2015 ................................................. 171 8 The Republic of Moldova ............................................................................................................. 173 8.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 173 8.2 The development of the governance of the higher education system in Moldova .............. 176 8.2.1 Experimentation and laisser-faire after independence (1991-1994) ............................ 177 8.2.2 Attempts to establish impartial instruments to regulate quality (1994-2001) ............. 178 8.2.3 Re-Centralization of powers in the Ministry of Education (2001-2006) ..................... 181 8.2.4 Creation of dysfunctional public structures (2006-2009) ............................................ 183 8.2.5 The long struggle for a new system of governance (2009-2015) ................................ 184 8.3 The governance model of the Moldovan HE system by 2015 ............................................ 194 9 Cross-National Comparison of Developments and Discussion of Results ................................... 197 9.1 How has the governance of higher education systems changed between 1991-2015? ....... 197 9.1.1 Common challenges and similar answers .................................................................... 197 9.1.2 Diverging paths ........................................................................................................... 200 9.1.3 Two-track state steering system in Russia ................................................................... 203 9.1.4 Marketization and expanding state-overseen stakeholder governance in Kazakhstan 205 page 4 9.1.5 Imitation of “European” institutions in Moldova ........................................................ 207 9.2 Is there a convergence towards a “post-Soviet” or global model of governance of higher education systems? .......................................................................................................................... 208 9.2.1 Quality Assurance ....................................................................................................... 208 9.2.2 Institutional Governance and University Autonomy ................................................... 210 9.2.3 Regulation of access .................................................................................................... 211 9.2.4 Financing ..................................................................................................................... 212 9.2.5 Conclusion: Is there a common model of governance? ............................................... 213 9.3 The interplay of national, regional and global factors on the development of the governance of higher education .......................................................................................................................... 218 9.3.1 Global and European forces ........................................................................................ 218 9.3.2 Regional forces ............................................................................................................ 224 9.3.3 National-level: Governments and Ministries responsible for higher education .......... 225 9.3.4 National-level: Stakeholder organizations................................................................... 232 9.3.5 National-level: Higher Education Institutions ............................................................. 234 9.3.6 National-level: Institutional factors of path dependence ............................................. 235 10 Discussion and Outlook .............................................................................................................. 244 10.1 Concluding reflections on the contribution of this study to the field of research ................ 246 11 References .................................................................................................................................. 247 12 Annexes ...................................................................................................................................... 269 12.1 Annex 1: Russia - The governance of the higher education system .................................... 269 12.1.1 Russia: Structure of the higher education system ........................................................ 269 12.1.2 Actors and their capabilities ........................................................................................ 273 12.1.3 Instruments of higher education governance in Russia ............................................... 283 12.1.4 Competitive programs for investment and differentiation of higher education........... 295 12.2 Annex 2: Kazakhstan – The governance of the higher education system ........................... 299 12.2.1 Kazakhstan: Structure of the higher education system ................................................ 299 12.2.2 Actors and their capabilities ........................................................................................ 302 12.2.3 Instruments of higher education governance in Kazakhstan ....................................... 310 12.3 Annex 3: Moldova – The governance of the higher education system ............................... 322 12.3.1 Moldova: Structure of the higher education system .................................................... 322 12.3.2 Actors and their capabilities ........................................................................................ 325 12.3.3 Instruments of higher education governance in Moldova ........................................... 328 12.4 Annex 4: The European “infrastructure” of quality assurance ............................................ 336

Thesis (M. Tech. (Engineering: Electrical)) -- Central University of technology, Free State, [2014] / The project is aimed at exploring the application of Machine Vision in a Reconfigurable Manufacturing System (RMS) Environment. The Machine Vision System interfaces with the RMS to verify the reconfiguration and positioning of devices within the assembly system, and inspects the product for defects that infringe on the quality of that product. The vision system interfaces to the Multi-agent System (MAS), which is in charge of scheduling and allocating resources of the RMS, in order to communicate and exchange data regarding the quality of the product. The vision system is comprised of a Compact Vision System (CVS) device with fire-wire cameras to aid in the image acquisition, inspection and verification process. Various hardware and software manufacturers offer a platform to implement this with a multiple array of vision equipment and software packages. The most appropriate devices and software platform were identified for the implementation of the project. An investigation into illumination was also undertaken in order to determine whether external lighting sources would be required at the point of inspection. Integration into the assembly system involved the establishment communication between the vision system and assembly system controller.