In Bologna Process Implementation Report 2012 wordt gesteld datin de afgelopen jaren druk is komen te staan op de financiering vanhet hoger onderwijs door de verschillende Europese landen.Nederland presteert daarbinnen nog bovengemiddeld, maar over degehele linie is een teruglopend percentage van de publieke uitgaveningeboekt voor hoger onderwijs.
Ook op het gebied van de andere implementatiepunten van Bolognazijn er punten van zorg. Zo zijn er in Europa grote verschillen tezien in de implementatie van LevenLangLeren-trajecten en blijft inheel Europa de uitgaande mobiliteit met slechts 1% van de studentendie buiten de European Higher Education Area (EHEA) gaan studerennog steeds erg laag.
De belangrijkste punten uit het Bologna-rapport van 2012 leest uhieronder:
“Although practically all EHEA countries have established someform of external quality assurance system, there aresignificant differences in purpose and approach. The majority ofsystems across the EHEA are primarily supervisory in character.Indeed 21 systems have established agencies with decision-makingpowers – including countries where the agency makes a proposal fordecision and the government is responsible for the actualdecision.
11 systems have agencies that are advisory and moreenhancement-oriented in character. Four countries (Austria,Liechtenstein, Malta and Switzerland) point to a mixed situation,with different agencies having different orientations
Many external quality assurance systems fail to take a holisticview of quality, with student services being the most commonly neglected key issue. With regard to stakeholderparticipation in external quality assurance, there is also some wayto go before students systematically participate in all relevantprocesses.”
“Most of he countries combine policy actions focusing onselected societal groups with general policy measures targeting allstudents (or prospective students). These measures commonly includefinancial support schemes, outreach programmes as well as theprovision of alternative access routes to higher education, andguidance and counselling services.”
“In the EHEA, an increasing percentage of the population isachieving a higher education qualification. However, not all thosewho enter higher education actually finish. While available dataare imperfect, they indicate that more than 60 % of highereducation entrants are graduating in almost all systems with afirst and/or second cycle qualification. However a substantialpercentage of students drop out before graduating.
Indeed, in half of the EHEA countries, the unemployment ratio ofrecent graduates is higher than 10 %, which is more than threetimes the median rate for young people three or more years aftergraduation”
“Most countries recognise the need to enhance flexible deliveryof higher education programmes and they address this issue throughvarious policy actions. While in some countries lifelong learningin higher education embraces a wide range of activities, in others,the list is still relatively limited.
Around two-thirds of countries have established an officialstudent status other than the status of a fulltime student. Oftensuch students (e.g. part-time students) are associated withlifelong learning programmes. Yet studying with a formal statusother than full-time often requires higher private financialinvestment than studying under traditional arrangements. Therefore,the existence of alternative student statuses needs to be seen inclose relation to financial arrangements that apply to eachcategory of students.
Participation rates of mature students are as low as 2 % of thetotal student population in some countries. At the other end of thespectrum are the Nordic countries and the United Kingdom, wheremature students represent around one third of the total studentpopulation. This suggests that EHEA countries address the needsand expectations of “lifelong learners” with very different degrees of intensity. “
“Currently, all but two countries show an incoming degreemobility rate of less than 10 % in the European Higher EducationArea. The vast majority of countries have values below 5 %. This isalso true concerning outward degree mobility rates of graduatesinside the EHEA. The weighted average for this mobility flow iscurrently slightly below 2 %. For outward mobility of studentsgoing outside the EHEA for study, the rate for the majority ofcountries is less than 1 %.
However, as these figures are related only to degree mobility,statistical information on credit mobility has to be added andtaken into consideration when assessing progress towards the 20 %benchmark. The current projection of shortterm trends in theframework of the Erasmus programme anticipates 7 % by 2020, whileother sources of reliable credit mobility data also need to beidentified and added. “
Het volledige rapport leest u
Leergemeenschappen zijn versnellers van leven lang ontwikkelen
Wie heeft er gelijk over digitale veiligheid, Van Engelshoven of de AIVD?
Zowel links als rechts verantwoordelijk voor academische zelfcensuur
Academische leerkracht verlaat po door gebrek aan uitdaging en beloning
Hoogleraren waarschuwen dat data Nederlandse universiteiten niet veilig is