UNESCO/OECD Guidelines on transborder higher education

1. UNESCO/OECD Guidelines on transborder higher education Brussels October 26 2005 Counsellor Jan S. Levy

2. Type Main forms Examples Size 1. People Students/ trainees Student mobility -Full study abroad for a foreign degree or qualification - Part of academic partnership for home degree or joint degree -Exchange programmes Probably the largest share of cross border education Professors/ trainers Academic /trainer mobility - For professional development- As part of an academic partnership- Employment in foreign university- To teach in a branch institution abroad An old tradition in the education sector, which should grow given the emphasis on mobility of professionals and internationalisation of education more generally 2. Programmes Educational programmes Academic partnerships E-learning - Joint course or a programme with a foreign institution- E-learning programmes- Selling/franchising a course to a foreign institution Academic partnerships represent the largest share of these activities. E-learning and franchising are small but rapidly growing 3. Institutions/ providers Foreign campuses Foreign investments - Opening of a foreign campus- Buying (part of) a foreign educational institution- Creation of an educational provider abroad A trend increasing very quickly form a low starting point Types of cross-border education activities

3. There is a need for an educational response • What should we achieve? • Learners need to be protected from the risks of misinformation, low-quality provision and qualifications of limited validity • Qualifications should be readable and transparent in order to increase their international validity and portability • Qualifications should be recognised internationally with as few difficulties as possible • National quality assurance and accreditation agencies need to intensify their international cooperation in order to increase their mutual understanding

4. The educational response (2) • Who should take responsibility of the response? • Organisations with high degree of legitimacy in the world of education • Global organisations, encompassing governments and stakeholders • UNESCO and OECD joining forces • Soft laws • Legal instruments

5. The educational response (3) • How could it be implemented? • Developing guidelines on quality provision in higher education • Governments • Higher education institutions • Quality assurance and accreditation agencies • Student bodies • Information centres of recognition • Professional bodies • Development of reliable information tools for learners/students/institutions • Global Database on nationally approved providers/provision

6. Status • Working group open to all OECD/UNESCO members and stakeholders • One set of guidelines agreed upon in March - but two different decisions: • OECD in April agreed to aiming at a Council decision by the end of this year. • UNESCO procedures did not permit adoption by this year’s General Conference. Guidelines are being issued as a secretariat document and as such distributed to the 190 member countries of UNESCO

7. Status • Even if the guidelines will have different status in the two organisations, they have been issued with the stamp of two major international organisations, and could be looked upon as a global reference for cross-border higher education. • Example: Nigeria informed GC that they already have presented the guidelines for parliament as the rules that should be followed in their country.

8. Guidelines for Governments • They should establish or encourage the establishment of a comprehensive, fair and transparent system of registration or licensing for CBHE providers wishing to operate in their territory • Comprehensive capacity for reliable QA and accreditation of CBHE • Provide accurate and easily accessible information on criteria and standards for registration etc. • Develop or encourage bilateral or multilateral recognition agreements

9. Guidelines for HE institutions/providers • Underlining that staff contributions are indispensable for institutions’ commitment to quality • Ensure that the programmes they deliver across borders and in their home country are of comparable quality • Institutions should take into account the UNESCO recommendation concerning the Status of HE Teaching Personnel.

10. Guidelines for HE institutions/providers (contd.) • Take full responsibility for information and guidance when using agents to promote their programmes • Respect QA systems in receiving countries, including when delivering distance education • Use Codes of good practice when relevant • Ensure financial transparency

11. Guidelines for student bodies • Student bodies bear the responsibility of helping students and potential students to carefully scrutinise information available • The emergence of autonomous student bodies should be encouraged and supported, so that student bodies • Can be involved as active partners at international, national and institutional levels in the development, monitoring and maintenance of quality provision • Increase students awareness of potential risks such as misleading guidance and information • Establish list of relevant questions to be asked by students enrolling in CBHE.

12. Guidelines for QA and accreditation bodies • Ensure that their work include CP provision in its various modes • Sustain and strengthen the existing regional and international networks or establish regional networks • Strengthen collaboration between the bodies of the sending and the receiving country • Provide accurate and easily accessible information on the assessment standards, procedures and effects of their mechanisms.

13. Guidelines for academic recognition bodies • Underline the importance of the regional conventions • Establish and maintain regional and international networks • Strengthen co-operation with QA bodies • Use codes of good practice for assessment of qualifications

14. Guidelines for professional bodies • Develop information channels accessible both to national and foreign holders of qualifications. • Establish and maintain contacts between professional bodies of both sending and receiving countries and other stakeholders to improve qualification assessment methodologies. • Establish, develop and implement criteria and procedures for comparing programmes and qualifications