Search

This report reviews the use of loans for learning in 33 European countries and analyses the schemes in eight selected Member States: France, Hungary, the Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Finland, Sweden and the UK. The analysis shows that loan schemes vary considerably across Europe in terms of types and levels of learning covered, conditions of access, repayment and governance. Some loans aim to increase participation in learning in general, while others are designed to promote equity. The report attempts to assess the selected loans and discusses their strengths and weaknesses and determinants of performance, while considering if a given scheme operates on a large scale or targets niche groups. The evaluation results provide a basis for identifying good practice principles for designing and implementing loans. Policy recommendations are formulated based on these findings. Annexed are: (1) Methodology; (2) Key terms and definitions; (3) Information on countries/schemes selected for in-depth analysis; (4) Proposed typologies of VET loan schemes; (5) Tables and figures; (6) Tosmana truth tables; (7) Questionnaires; (8) Basic characteristics of non-European loan schemes. (Contains 37 tables, 5 figures, 20 boxes and 33 footnotes.)

This paper reports that between 2008 and 2009, unemployment rates across OECD countries increased among people at all educational levels, but rose to especially troubling heights among people without an upper secondary education. In 2009, the average employment rate across OECD countries was much higher for individuals with a tertiary (i.e. higher) education--indicating a better match between the skills these people have and the skills the labour market required. Between 2008 and 2009, the earnings advantage for people with a tertiary education remained strong in OECD countries. In some countries, earnings inequality between people with a tertiary education and those without an upper secondary education widened even further.

This document reviews how performance indicators are currently being used in several Commonwealth countries the United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada, and identifies some of the issues associated with performance indicator development and application. It also examines whether there are any agreed upon "key", or common, indicators that can be applied universally. After briefly discussing the background of the study and defining the terminology of, the audiences for, and applications of performance indicators, the paper reviews sources of higher education data published by government, government agencies, or national university organizations, and discusses developments in the application of performance indicators. Case studies from the U.K., Australia, and Canada are used to examine five types of indicators: student indicators, such as population, progression/completion rates, destination and satiation; staff indicators; resource and financial indicators; research indicators; and estate management/physical resources indicators. The characteristics of "good" indicators and various concerns surrounding the use of indicators are also addressed. Findings suggest that performance indicators need to be related to institution objectives, should be used with other measures, and cannot presently be used to compare institutions in different countries. Appendices include lists of sources, publications, and contacts; a comprehensive list of possible indicators, and core indicators recommended by the Council of Ontario Universities. (BF)