260215 towards a national strategy all_28022015

40
1 Hanover, 23 rd August 2010 Consultation of the EUROSTUDENT network Vienna 25-27 February 2015 Track – Towards a national strategy for the social dimension in higher education

Upload: dominic-orr

Post on 05-Aug-2015

50 views

Category:

Education


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

1Hanover, 23rd August 2010Consultation of the EUROSTUDENT network

Vienna25-27 February 2015

Track – Towards a national strategy for the social dimension in higher education

2Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Track concept

It has been difficult to translate this into a manageable policy agenda - largely because concrete definitions and the identification of concrete problems are needed for the social dimension, but these are national-context specific and evolving.

• To highlight how the current Bologna Process has been dealing with this challenge, but it will particularly focus on the process and outcomes of the three Country Reviews carried out in the framework of PL4SD in Lithuania, Armenia and Croatia.

• To think about how to formulate and implement a national strategy or national action plan for improving the social dimension.

Chairs: Dominic Orr, DZHW and Melinda Szabo, EQAR

3Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

2. At entry to higher education

3. Studyframework

4. Graduation & transition

Participative equity – 4 “moments” in a HE system1.

Bef

ore

entr

y to

hig

her e

duca

tion

Qualification and decision-making

=> raising aspirations

Selection=> widening access study progression and

completion, study-work-life balance

=>(i) to ensure students’ learning progress and (ii) to reduce impact of students’

need to balance the resources of time and money on

students’ success

transition into labour market or further educational training=> secure a successful transition (and perhaps to raise aspirations)

4Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

The influence of study framework on studying

Source: EUROSTUDENT V, Subtopics I.10-12

Track – The PL4SD Country Reviews

6Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

On the way to a National Strategy: PL4SD Country Review in Lithuania

Patrick ClancyUniversity College Dublin

Ireland

7Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Rationale for Country Review

Open Method of Coordination (OMC)

Securing agreement on policy objectives

Declarations and commitments

Institutionalised stocktaking

Report on achievements Good practice examples Target setting etc.

8Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Objectives/Strategies for the Social Dimension in Higher Education

• Student Body, entering, participating and completing

HE – should reflect the diversity of population

• Completion objective - remove obstacles – adequate

services - flexible pathways

• Report on strategies and evaluation methods

• Set targets for under-represented groups

• Voluntary peer learning (Bucharest Communiqué)

9Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Methodology

• Select International Review Team

• Prepare Background Report

• Site visit

• Country Report

10Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

External Review Team

• Project Consortium Members – Martin Unger & Petra Wejwar, Institute of Advanced

Studies, Vienna.– Dominic Orr & Melinda Szabo, Centre for Research on

Higher Education and Science Studies, Hannover.

• External Experts– Hanne Smidt, Policy advisor, EUA.– Allan Pall, Student Expert, Former Chair, ESU. – Patrick Clancy, Sociologist, University College Dublin.

11Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Background Report

• General Information on Lithuania• History of Higher Education System• Organisation of Lithuanian HE

– Before entry to HE– At entry to HE

• Study costs and student supports

– Study Framework and student body– Graduation and Transition

12Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Country Visit

• Preparatory Meeting in Lithuania – Dominic Orr• Team visit 5th to 9th of May• Interviews with approximately 80 individuals

– Vice-Minister and officials from Ministry of Education and Science; Rectors Conference; National Students Union; Research and HE Monitoring and Analysis Centre; and representatives of other agencies concerned with HE such as QA, Special Needs, State Studies Foundation etc.

• Site Visits to 2 Universities and 1 Regional College.

13Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Some Findings and Observations(Before entry to HE)

• Structure of Second Level System– High levels of stratification not just academic/vocational

distinction

– Variety of grade structures and transition point

• Implications of Information Differentials between

parents/families

• High stakes terminal examination, emphasis on

‘merit’ as reflected in exam performance.

14Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Some Findings and Observations (At entry to HE)

• Dual track funding system – half of places ‘state funded’.

• Apparent strong support for merit based system• Merit versus needs based funding?• Consequences with respect to choice of study

programme• Limited second chance opportunities

15Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Some Findings and Observations (Study Framework)• Focus here was on retention and progression• High cost of study – high levels of part-time work – need for

more flexible provision• Student financial support contingent on satisfactory

performance • Importance of student support services• Importance of good quality data on progression and dropout

rates• Scope to incentivise HEIs for providing:

– More inclusive learning environment – More flexible learning opportunities esp. for non-traditional students.

16Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Some Findings and Observations(Graduation and Transition)

• (Not a central focus of our analysis)• Limited progression from Professional Bachelor

Degree to Master’s degree• Scope for joint degrees or cooperative study

programmes

17Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Some Recommendations

• Need for national consultation on the social dimension including a re-

examination of the exclusive focus on ‘merit’ as currently embodied in

national policy

• Does second level system afford all students to compete on an equal

basis?

• Re-examine the equity implications of offering state funding solely on

the basis of academic performance

• Set national targets for the participation of under-represented groups

• Broadening the understanding of under-represented groups e.g. those

with disabilities

18Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Some Recommendations /cont.

• Introduce targeted funding to incentivise HEIs to offer reserved places and/or alternative entry routes

• Prioritise the development of IT systems to track performance and retention and monitor how HEIs use this information.

• Demographic decline offers scope to increase second chance opportunities

• Future strategy for policy development – top-down or bottom up or some combination of the two

19Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Overriding Conclusion

• Strong HE system which has achieved very high

participation rates

• Commendable emphasis on fairness and

transparency

• Limits of meritocracy

• See Lani Guinier The Tyranny of Meritocracy (2015) –

contrasts ‘testocratic merit’ with ‘democratic merit’

20Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

On the way to a National Strategy: PL4SD Country Review in Armenia

Dr. Jan SadlakPresident

IREG Observatory on Academic Ranking and Excellence

21Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Purpose of country review:

• To review of the country’s policy and practices in higher education with regard to objectives adopted under “social dimension” agenda;

• To review national and institutional circumstances relevant to “social dimension” in higher education;

• To examine in objective and transparent manner quantitative and qualitative information submitted in “Country Review”;

• To undertake a dialogue and collect additional information in order to provide context-relevant assessment and assistance for improving the implementation of “social dimension” national agenda [downside of external review process is revealing shortcomings – ‘curse of comparison’].

22Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

External Review Team

• External Experts– Jan Sadlak - President, IREG Observatory on Academic Ranking and

Excellence– Maria Kristin Gylfadottir - Erasmus+ Programme Manager in Iceland

(education and sport)– Koen Gever - PhD-Researcher at European University Institute

• Project Consortium Members – Martin Unger & Petra Wejwar, Institute of Advanced Studies, Vienna.– Dominic Orr & Melinda Szabo, Centre for Research on Higher Education

and Science Studies, Hannover.

23Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Insights and findings

• Higher education is identified as crucial for improvement of youth’s employment situation [unemployment rate among person of 15-24 years of age is around 30%];

• Constitutionally ‘everyone’ has a right for education. In reality it is limited and distributed on the basis of competition. Around 20% students receive full or partial tuition-free studies [at least 10% of study places in each field of study has to be tuition-free];

• Social consequences of a ‘double-track’ of funding of HE institutions [state support represents 20-25% of total income];

• Despite financial constraints participation rate of young people [18-22 years old] is relatively high – 37% in 2011 [44% in non-poor, 10% in extremely poor];

• Policy of reduction inequalities is in place [income-based criteria], which is addressed to improve participation of ‘underrepresented groups’ [rural and mountainous regions, representing ethnic minorities, students with disabilities, and those of killed and deceased military].

24Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Considerations and key recommendations

• Assure communication between policy makers and stakeholders of reforms;• Continue projects implemented with external support for policy development via

the TEMPUS/Erasmus+; • Adopt policies corresponding to specific needs of a given category of

underrepresented groups; • Improve data collection [better use of existing mechanisms such as at registration

for the central entrance examination or at enrolment to studies];• Develop benchmarks on the participation of underrepresented groups in higher

education; • Develop student support system, which is less fragmented and based on identified

needs;• Develop an integrated strategy to decrease demand for private tutoring

[improvement of secondary education];• Recognise the need of sustainability of higher education funding system;• Conduct periodic reviews of policy-making and implementation processes.

25Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

On the way to a National Strategy: PL4SD Country Review in Croatia

Prof. John BrennanOpen University, UK

26Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

External Review Team

External Experts•John Brennan - Professor of Higher Education Research at the Open University and Visiting Professor at the University of Bath, the London School of Economics and Political Science and London Metropolitan University •Liz Thomas - Professor of Higher Education, Faculty of Education Edge Hill University. Visiting Professor, Academic Development Unit, Staffordshire University •Vanja Ivoševiċ - Research Assistant and Marie Curie Doctoral Fellow at the University of Porto (Portugal) and former Chairperson of ESIB (currently ESU) Project Consortium Members •Martin Unger & Petra Wejwar, Institute of Advanced Studies, Vienna.•Dominic Orr & Melinda Szabo, Centre for Research on Higher Education and Science Studies, Hannover.

27Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Croatia: some background features

• Croatia joined the EU in 2013 and has a population of 4.3 million

• Half live in rural areas and 18% in Zagreb, the capital

• Lower than average GDP per capita, though doing better than most

neighbours

• Rising youth unemployment (50% in 2013) though some recent

improvement

• Educational attainment ‘below average’ in EU though some

improvement.

• 90% population are ethnic Croats, 4% Serbs and 0.7% Bosnian. 86%

Catholic faith.

28Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Croatia: its higher education- a binary system

• 7 public and 3 private universities

• Institutions providing professional studies

- 12 public and 4 private polytechnics

- 3 public and 25 private schools of professional H E

• Bologna reforms introduced a 3 cycle system

• A new Quality Assurance agency was established in 2009

• There has been a ‘spirit of change and reform’ and a huge growth in

providers, especially private ones

29Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Under-represented groups in higher education

• The Roma minority• People with special needs, with single parents or

from rural areas• Mature students, lower social classes

Financial support available for some of these groups.

30Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

EC Tempus report on under-represented groups

(i) students of lower socioeconomic status are under-represented in the student population

(ii) there are few mature students in higher education

(iii) vulnerable groups in higher education have greater financial difficulties and work-load (the most vulnerable are students of lower socioeconomic status and students with physical and mental disabilities).

(iv) certain adverse study conditions can also negatively impact on the experience of studying and learning outcomes, (the most students are those who work while studying).

(v) students at higher education institutions providing professional studies study in more adverse conditions than those in universities

31Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

The project’s review visit

• 5 day visit in September/October 2014

• 60 interviews with officials from government department,

representatives of other national groups & organisations, and

representatives of

- Zagreb School of Economics and Management

- University of Zagreb

- University of Rijeka

- Karlovac University College of Applied Sciences

32Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Some contextual features

• 50% of students attend the University of Zagreb• 20% attend higher education institutions providing

professional studies• Many students from rural areas study at the latter where

many students are part-time• System is both vertically and horizontally differentiated

33Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Before entry

• 95% of population complete upper secondary education but

differentiation of school system results in unequal opportunities

• General and vocational school routes provide differential opportunities

for progression to higher education

• School quality differences reflect regional and socio-economic

differences

• Children from highly educated parents 6 times more likely to enter

higher education

• Gender inequalities between subjects with consequences for higher

education and labour market progression

34Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

At entry

• Students from lower socio-economic groups tend to delay entry and

are more likely to enrol in professional studies

• Very small numbers of mature students and mainly part-time

• Absence of formal tracking limits capacity to monitor progression

• Online central admissions system has improved transparency and

fairness

• But general/vocational school divisions limit access to Matura and

higher education, especially for children from lower socio-economic

backgrounds

35Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Study frameworks

• Financial support arrangements are complex and fragmented

• A high proportion of students have to combine their studies with paid

employment

• Many students dependent on family or partner support

• Lack of transparency in financial support creates problems for decision-making

and policy implementation at all levels

• Merit-based rather than needs-based support further disadvantages the already

disadvantaged

• Stronger academic support arrangements are needed

• Overall, need for improvements to retention and learning progression

regardless of social and economic background

36Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Graduation and transition

• The national context of high unemployment rates creates particular

challenges

• A Youth Guarantee Scheme manages to reduce the length of

prolonged employment inactivity

• But there is a need for employers to be more involved in providing

information, advice and opportunities

• Graduates need support not just for initial entry to the labour

market but for lifelong movement through it

37Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Recommendations (short-term)actions which do not require major system change

1. A more unified system of data collection in a fragmented system.

2. Frequent (small-scale) research to support evidence-based policy.

3. Consolidate efforts to improve student support through encouraging different societal actors and direct stakeholders to work together.

4. Greater direct financial support through state scholarship.

38Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Recommendations (medium term)areas in which system change can be initiated after short-term recommendations implemented

5. Recognize and further support the key role which institutions providing professional studies and regional HEIs play for the social dimension.

6. Review the State Matura examination and its impacts.

7. Build on the reform of student support from indirect to direct support.

8. Review the effects of the quality of pre-tertiary education on young people’s opportunities to attend and thrive in tertiary education (university and universities of applied science).

39Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Recommendation (long-term)system change for the place of the social dimension

9. Seeing the social dimension as an important evaluative framework for the overall performance of Croatian higher education. In conclusion…..

“Focussing on issues such as the organisation of higher education delivery, pedagogy and assessment, integrated

student development and support and outcomes beyond higher education may indeed lead to improvements in the overall

quality and performance of the Croatian higher education, rather than only for underrepresented groups.”

All can benefit!

40Vienna, 25-27/02/2015Track “Towards a national strategy”PL4SD Country Review

Emerging themes from reviews and discussions

Principles of success and of justification for actiono Merit vs. need o Equality of opportunities vs. equality of outcomes

Can higher education be a role model for other parts of society or does it reflect common societal norms?

Location of support and division of responsibilities

o State-level: division of responsibilities between ministeries vs. joined up strategy

o HEI-level: special centres vs. throughout HEI (mainstream)

Governance issues (at pre-tertiary and tertiary levels)

o Financial incentives to reward performance on equity measureso Accreditation regulations and prestige through quality assurance

(making improving of social dimension issues part of excellence)