Search

This brief discusses cases of neo-nationalist violations of academic freedom in Hungary and Poland. The most prominent case of neo-nationalist violation of academic freedom in Hungary is the fate of the Central European University (CEU). The circumstances of CEU's forced move out of Hungary came before the European Court of Justice regarding it a possible violation of EU law. The Court cited the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) under one of the three pillars of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) 1994 agreement, free trade, and the determination that CEU was a form of international educational services that should not be denied to the people of Hungary. Poland has a similar hostile environment to academics and academic freedom, although with a glimmer of hope following recent elections. The brief also discusses how such open breaches of academic freedom as in Hungary or Poland, in which politicians directly try to exert influence on research institutions and professors, are fortunately rather rare in Germany. However, a confluence of factors perhaps obscures the differences between "academic freedom" and the "freedom of opinion." In Germany, academic freedom includes the search for topics, rigorous methodical investigation, and professional norms to express findings and competent opinions, whereas the free speech is outside of these professional norms. The brief concludes with a discussion of the role of universities and the future of democracy in the context of ensuring a space for free and open debate.

The academic professoriate is a determinant of successful higher education systems. Yet, recently, worsening conditions of employment, deteriorating salaries, and threats to job security have made the academic profession less attractive, especially to young scholars, in several countries. This paper investigates the salaries as well as the recruitment and retention procedures in public higher education institutions from a cross country perspective. The UK, Germany, France, and Italy are adopted as case studies to determine the attractiveness of European higher education systems. The evolution over the last decade creates an extremely variegated picture.

This Policy Paper aims at analysing the most important aspects of Public Responsibility, Financing and Governance of Higher Educations while seeking to formulate a students perspective on the state of play within the European Higher Education Area (EHEA). In doing so it touches upon the very foundation of how and in which socio-political environment educational systems and higher education institutions work nowadays. The European Students' Union (ESU) believes that open access to all levels of education is the cornerstone of a socially, culturally and democratically inclusive society, and a prerequisite for individual and societal development and well-being. ESU sees higher education as a human right, which is guaranteed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. How education is seen in society, how it is funded and how it is governed are tightly interlinked areas. This policy paper focuses on: (1) Public responsibility of higher education (fundamental values; institutional autonomy and academic freedom; academic integrity; intellectual property; education for sustainable development; human rights and democratic citizenship education; digitalization, artificial intelligence, learning analytics and privacy; commodification; partnerships between higher education institutions and industry; internships; and internationalisation and international trade); (2) Financing of higher education (financing of higher education; the funding gap; optimisation of funding of higher education institutions; performance based funding; and education free of tuition fees); and (3) Governance of higher education (students participation; working conditions of academic staff; committees and ombudsmans and leadership, intersectionality and training). [For the 2016 version, see ED587168.]

The European Union is likely the most far-developed cross-border public space for higher education. The European Higher Education Area (EHEA) and the European Research Area (ERA) both span an even larger number of countries including associate and partner countries of the EU. Based on shared European values, such as academic freedom, cross-border cooperation, and mobility, these policy frameworks have been developed in Europe over the last decades and with much success. HE systems in this area are thus well-positioned to benefit from cross-border mobility and collaboration but may at the same time face a certain loss of control over HE, for instance with respect to access due to the cross-border flows of students. This seems to make them vulnerable to populist tendencies and neo-nationalist politics seeking to inhibit the free movement of students, scholars, and data. Such tendencies have never been completely absent on the "old continent" but resurged over the uneven outcomes of globalization, the effects of the global financial and consequent Euro crisis, and the refugee crisis. Meanwhile, the impact of the coronavirus crisis is still by and large unknown. Populist tendencies seem now to be turning against the EU, with its freedom of movement for persons (i.e. open borders) as one of its cornerstones and are therefore of concern for the HE sector. Countries such as the UK, Switzerland, Denmark, and the Netherlands have a different position in the European landscape but are all struggling with the complexity of combining the virtues of an open system with constrained national sovereignty. Sovereignty is required in terms of steering capacity in order to balance access, cost, and quality, i.e. the well-known "higher education trilemma." In open systems this is challenged by the "globalization trilemma", which states that countries cannot have national sovereignty, (hyper)globalization and democracy at the same time. How are the EU, its Member States, and the HE sector responding? Will the Union stay united (i.e. Brexit)? Are the legal competencies of the EU in HE strong enough? What about the many European university associations, leagues, and networks? And what do the millions of (former) Erasmus students have to say?

This publication is the sixth in a series produced as part of the Cedefop project The changing nature and role of VET (2016-18). Based on analysis of developments over the past two decades (1995-2015), the report provides important insights into developments and change processes related to vocationally oriented education and training at higher levels (levels 5 to 8 of the European qualifications framework). Building on detailed national case studies, the report demonstrates the expansion and diversification of vocationally oriented education and training offered at higher levels in European countries and the variations in how countries use the higher levels: there is evidence for strengthening vocational principles at higher levels in various ways as well as for strengthening academic principles. It also covers current debates and potential future challenges, including juggling labour market demands and wider societal values, finding the right balance between academic and vocational principles, and achieving parity of esteem between academically oriented and vocationally oriented qualifications at higher levels, by improving awareness and visibility of the latter. [The research was carried out by a consortium led by 3s Unternehmensberatung GmbH, and includes the Danish Technological Institute, the Institute of Employment Research (University of Warwick), the Institute of International and Social Studies (Tallinn University) and Fondazione Giacomo Brodolini. The Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training (BIBB) in Germany is supporting the project as a subcontractor.]

Classrooms have become increasingly diverse places where students from various backgrounds share their learning experiences. To promote inclusive school settings for all, building teacher capacity for inclusive teaching represents a key policy area. Education systems need to ensure that teachers are adequately prepared for inclusive teaching and supported throughout their career. Mechanisms to attract and retain a more diverse teaching body as well as to monitor and evaluate teacher preparation and work with respect to diversity and inclusion should also be developed. While teacher policies have increasingly addressed some of these areas, most education systems lack comprehensive capacity-building frameworks for inclusive teaching. This paper maps policies and practices to build teacher capacity for inclusive teaching across OECD countries. It then presents core elements and competences to design and implement inclusive teaching strategies. Finally, the paper reviews some of the evidence available on teacher diversity and interventions for inclusive teaching.

This ESIR Focus Paper provides a 'deeper dive' into the role of European Universities in achieving systemic change in the post-pandemic economy and society. It builds on and complements ESIR's second Policy Brief, which offers guidance on how a 'protect-prepare-transform' approach in the post-pandemic Europe can ensure fast learning from innovation by relying on smart and coherent policies, collaborative efforts across levels of government and decentralisation of governance, and most importantly the courage to direct research and innovation at the transformations Europe is facing.

International students are critical to the competitiveness of American higher education in terms of financial, intercultural, and educational contributions. However, recent data indicates that the U.S institutions enrolled 31,520 fewer international students in Fall 2017 as compared to Fall 2016. At average tuition and fees of US$ 25,000, higher education institutions are likely to lose potential revenue of US$ 788 million for the first year of studies alone. This paper examines the shifting landscape of international enrollment from the lens of three overlapping Waves spread over seven years and takes a deeper dive into implications for American universities. Wave I was shaped by the terrorist attacks in September 2001 and resulted in slower overall growth in international student enrollment of 11% between 1999 and 2006. Wave II has its origins in the global financial crisis which prompted universities to search for self-funded students and experienced overall robust growth of 44 percent in international student enrollment between 2006 and 2013. Finally, Wave III is shaped by the new political order and intensified competition from English-taught programs in Europe and Asia which will slow down the pace of projected growth in international enrollment to 18 percent between 2013 and 2020. In this current Wave of intensified global competition, overall international student enrollment is likely to flatten or decline for most universities. While the reputation and quality of American higher education is admired and emulated around the world, resting on its past laurels will not be sufficient for attracting international students in the Third Wave. This means that universities must get proactive and strategic in reaching, engaging and supporting international students throughout their educational lifecycle. Demand for studying abroad among international students remains robust, however, increasing competition and expectations for value for money will requires proactive and concerted efforts to maintain the global competitiveness of American higher education.

The 2020 EUA Learning & Teaching Thematic Peer Group on "Environmental sustainability of learning and teaching" discussed how learning and teaching can embrace and promote sustainability, and whether existing approaches to learning and teaching are sustainable. This paper presents the group's findings, which aim to promote and guide action across universities to embed a holistic approach to sustainability in their education provision, by using the UN Sustainable Development Goals as a basis.

The aim of the paper is to review scholarly attempts to define or explain vocational education and training and to develop a theoretical model to analyse national definitions or conceptions of VET [vocational education and training] and how they have changed over time. VET takes many forms and is, perhaps, the least unitary of education sectors. Based on a literature review of previous attempts to characterise VET, the paper suggests using a multi-perspective framework which combines: (a) an epistemological and pedagogical perspective; (b) a system and institutional perspective; and (c) a socioeconomic and labour market perspective to analyse VET. These perspectives can help to identify appropriate learning approaches, institutional solutions and forms of cooperation to work towards. In Volume 2 of this series, the approach is empirically tested and the different understandings of VET in 30 European countries are illustrated. [This research paper is the first in a series produced as part of the Cedefop project, "The changing nature and role of VET (2016-18)." The research was carried out by a consortium led by 3s Unternehmensberatung GmbH. For Volume 2, see ED586252. For Volume 3, see ED586256.]

At some future point, when a definitive history of the assessment movement is written, one of the most frequently cited, influential publications will be "Assessment Update" ("AU"). Since 1989, this bimonthly newsletter has been published by Jossey-Bass in partnership with Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI). It is no coincidence that the two most frequent contributors to "AU," Trudy Banta--"AU"'s founding editor and intellectual muse--and Peter Ewell, are also among the most prolific thinkers and writers shaping the scholarship and practice of student learning outcomes assessment. In this featured NILOA occasional paper, Banta and Ewell with the assistance of Cynthia Cogswell mine the pages of "AU" between 2000 through 2015 to distill the major themes and advances that characterize the evolution of assessment as a field of professional practice. [Foreword by George D. Kuh.]

Despite the international commitment to Roma social inclusion from 2005 onwards, the overall situation has not significantly changed. In education, important achievements have been reached, mainly in terms of access to primary. Yet, Roma students still lag behind. This paper maps policy initiatives for Roma inclusion in European education systems, analyses remaining challenges and explores policy perspectives. It first describes European countries' conceptualisation and categorisation of ethnic groups. In doing so, it differentiates colour-blind countries that prohibit diversity data and prioritise integrated approaches in policymaking, and countries that collect such data and use targeted approaches. This work then identifies initiatives aimed at improving Roma students' inclusion and recurrent challenges, such as segregation in education and anti-Gypsyism. The few evaluations available indicate that best practices are those that (1) combine mainstream and targeted approaches; (2) are community-based, with a genuine participation of Roma; (3) are conscious of cultural disparities; and (4) adopt an intercultural approach.

The European University Association (EUA) Learning & Teaching Thematic Peer Group on "Internationalisation in learning and teaching" considers strategic and comprehensive internationalisation as a fit-for-purpose and timely means for universities to address global challenges and provide high-quality education. This paper presents the work and conclusions of the group. The group found that while mobility and language issues are central aspects of an internationalised education, many institutions place too much focus on these while neglecting other means of ensuring the provision of internationalised education designed to educate globally minded and skilled citizens. These alternative means are further explored in the paper.

This Cedefop study focuses on the contribution that vocational education and training (VET) can make to reducing early leaving from education and training (ELET). Published in two volumes, the first is dedicated to understanding better the learning pathways of young students, providing measurements of early leaving in VET, and understanding the role of VET in breaking the vicious cycle of early leaving and unemployment. This second volume reviews VET-related measures to tackle ELET, either by preventing learners dropping out and/or by bringing those who have already left back to education and training. This volume identifies and discusses the key features of successful policies and practices, plus the conditions necessary to evaluate and upscale successful regional and local practices to national strategies. Contains an annex of reviewed evaluations and main results. Includes a bibliography and webliography. [ICF consulting services conducted the research for this report. For "Leaving Education Early: Putting Vocational Education and Training Centre Stage. Volume I: Investigating Causes and Extent. Cedefop Research Paper. No 57," see ED573444.]

This Cedefop study examines the contribution that vocational education and training (VET) can make to reducing early leaving from education and training (ELET). Published in two volumes, this first looks at quantitative data to understand better the extent of early leaving from VET (ELVET). It analyses mechanisms for monitoring early leaving (at national and EU-levels), and examines VET and labour-market-specific factors, as well as those related to the individual and his/her family background, contributing to this phenomenon. It aims to assist national policy-makers and decision-makers at different levels in developing existing monitoring systems to measure ELVET and inform VET policies to tackle ELET. It also aims to assist European stakeholders to refine the EU indicator to capture the important variations in individual situations of early leavers. The second volume reviews VET-related measures to tackle ELET, either by preventing learners dropping out and/or by bringing those who have already left back to education and training. Contains a bibliography and webliography. [ICF consulting services conducted the research for this report. For "Leaving Education Early: Putting Vocational Education and Training Centre Stage. Volume II: Evaluating Policy Impact. Cedefop Research Paper. No 58," see ED573445.]

The digital transformation of our societies is moving ahead, changing the way that we work and interact. It is also changing learning environments and the need for digital skills. This paper argues for a differentiated approach by universities to digital skills, identifying three groups of learners: (1) ICT [Information and Communication Technologies] specialists who need training in ethics (including privacy and bias) and where universities need to ensure diversity, (2) learners who will enter fields where the professional practice is already disrupted by digital technologies, for example medicine and law, and (3) learners who face unpredictability in how digital technologies will impact their careers, but who still require knowledge about them. These groups will have different needs, as will individuals within the groups. This paper offers suggestions on adapting learning environments to meet these needs. These include the use of problem-based learning that will enable universities to provide exposure to digital technology, as well as using interdisciplinary teams and learning analytics as a way to predict and adapt to individual learning needs.