The Occupy Student Debt Campaign, an offshoot of the Occupy movement focusing on student debt and urging students to pledge not to repay their loans if other borrowers join them, planned several events Wednesday to commemorate the total amount of student debt passing $1 trillion reports Inside Higher Ed.
My colleague Ashwini and I happened to be in New York during one of the planned demonstrations at Union Square (all photos from that event). New York serves as the headquarters and regional offices of the student lender Sallie Mae. Unless the U.S. Congress intervenes, interest rates on subsidized Stafford loans are set to double from 3.4% to 6.8% on July 1. Additional rallies occurred at colleges across the country, including the University of Chicago, Brooklyn College, Cooper Union, Hampshire College, the University of Wisconsin at Madison, and the University of California at Santa Cruz.
Student also continue to rally in Quebec, Canada (going for 11 weeks strong) to protest a proposed 75% tuition increase at public colleges there.
Democracy Now! provided coverage of the US events along with an interview with Pamela Brown, a Ph.D. student who helped launch the Occupy Student Debt Campaign "Pledge of Refusal." See the interview below.
Finally, President Obama weighed in on the issue on a visit to UNC-Chapel Hill and recorded a comedic take on the issue with Jimmy Fallon.
The AASHE Bulletin has an "Affordability & Access" section. Check out past stories in the Bulletin database, and subscribe to the Bulletin to keep informed about such matters and campus sustainability in general.
AASHE's Higher Education Occupy Project - AASHE put together a photo essay based on submissions from various individuals from all over North America to better understand the connection between higher education and the Occupy movement.
The "Higher Education in the Digital Age" program area is devoted to the policy implications of emerging information and communication technologies (ICTs) for higher education. In our "Higher Education in the Digital Age" research, we take a comparative perspective on the policy and institutional questions associated with integrating ICTs into the academic milieu, including college and university teaching, research, and administration. Our ongoing work suggests that two broad and interrelated areas of inquiry are in need of immediate multidisciplinary and comparative analysis: 1) Costs and Benefits: Economic, Academic, and Social, and 2) Patterns of Institutional Change and Strategic Choices.
As part of this research area, CSHE has particular interest in tracking and analyzing the myriad developments in on-line distributed education that are taking place at UC Berkeley, and throughout the University of California (UC) ten-campus system. The Higher Education in the Digital Age (HEDA) program area is under the direction of Dr. Diane Harley.
Peer Review in Academic Promotion and Publishing: Its Meaning, Locus, and Future
A Project Report and Associated Recommendations, Proceedings from a Meeting, and Background Papers. Authors: Diane Harley and Sophia Krzys Acord.
Final Report Available:
Assessing the Future Landscape of Scholarly Communication: An Exploration of Faculty Values and Needs in Seven Disciplines. Authors: Diane Harley, Ph.D., Senior Researcher and Principal Investigator; Sophia Krzys Acord, Ph.D.; Sarah Earl-Novell, Ph.D.; Shannon Lawrence, M.A.; C. Judson King, Professor, Provost Emeritus, and Principal Investigator.
Open and Affordable Textbooks Project
The Student Public Interest Research Groups (PIRGs) have been working on the problem of textbook affordability for college students. Open Educational Resources (OER)learning materials, distributed openly for either no or minimal cost, may have begun to result in a credible, viable infrastructure for Open Textbooks that mainstream faculty would accept. The Student PIRGs have launched a two-year campaign (MakeTextbooksAffordable.org) to drive mainstream faculty's acceptance of Open Textbooks in place of traditional textbooks. The goal of the campaign is to raise faculty awareness of the issue, and encourage faculty to sign a public statement of support. The Student PIRGs believe that such a network would encourage development and distribution of OER in wider circles of the academic community. This project is under the direction of Principal Investigator Diane Harley.
Digital Resource Study
A research project studying the use of digital resources in undergraduate education in the humanities and social sciences. The Higher Education in the Digital Age Project has completed a three-year research project investigating the use of digital collections in undergraduate humanities and social science education.
The Future of Scholarly Communication
An Investigation of Peer Review in Academic Promotion and Publishing: Its Meaning, Locus, and Future
This project is under the direction of principal investigator Diane Harley. In 2009 and 2010, we hosted a number of meetings with experts to explore how peer review relates to scholarly communication and academic values. The topics covered included assessing various forms of peer review and which are needed for specific academic purposes (e.g., advancement, publishing, extramural funding, national and international stature). Additionally, a considerable amount of time was spent discussing the perception that, although peer review represents the best available system, there are nonetheless a multitude of problems with it. Flowing from our research and discussions was a proposal that it would be useful to examine how separating the peer review process from publication, and vice versa, might most effectively and practicably be accomplished given the currently entrenched system of peer review (which is organized primarily by publishers but carried out by faculty). In October 2009, the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation awarded CSHE a grant to explore the ramifications of separating these activities and, perhaps, creating a research dissemination system that is informed by, but not necessarily fully combined to, its own formal peer review system. The report from this research is published here.
Regulation of E-Learning
CSHE is conducting a research project to explore and inform current and ongoing debates in the regulation of technology-mediated higher education both domestically and internationally. Project activities include commissioning a set of white papers and analyses, which will provide the basis for discussion and debate at a small by-invitation symposium in early 2006. The symposium will be used to identify further research on the most promising topics, and the proceedings will be published through this website.
The event was opened yesterday with a reception where the Romanian prime miniester gave a speech where he emphasized both the value of human capital as a resource in global markets and expressed his wishes of the newest Bucharest Communique delivering an important message for the further development of the Euroepan Higher Education Area.
To what extent this will be the case remains to be seen. The event has attracted more than 500 participants from 80 countries, far exceeding the 47 who are official members. A few days ago it was announced that Belarus will still not be able to join the process due to their lack of reforms and intentions of respecting academic freedom. However – a large number of the ministers of education from the larger countries have opted to not join the Ministerial Conference and these countries will be represented by state secretaries instead. While in essence a technical matter, one can wonder whether this also gives an indication of the relative importance of the Bologna Process in these countries.
The draft communique in itself is not very revolutionary and provocative and the general mood appears to be that there will not be major changes or points that would create a potential controversy. And, there are increasing voices being raised over the future of Bologna as a whole. What should be the main focus? Should there be a Bologna process? What about future expansion? These remain to be seen during the debates during today and tomorrow.
Since Hedda researchers are participating as observes, we will be giving you all the news after the conference! Meanwhile, you can enjoy listening to our previous podcasts with two key people in the Bologna process:
The power of learning and education can transform people’s lives by developing knowledge, skills and competences that enable them to develop their full potential, and also to live wealthier and healthier lives. Moreover, the values taught and practised in educational settings have a significant impact on whether learning acquired there will lead to peace, democracy, sustainability, tolerance, respect for others, intercultural understanding - or not.
UIL’s involvement and action during the first quarter of 2012 focusses on a plethora of value-based learning and education activities that are being dealt with through advocacy, research, capacity-building and networking. In order better to serve Member States, UIL is organising its activities in three programmes in 2012 i.e. literacy and basic skills, adult learning and education, and lifelong learning policies and strategies. This sharpened profile of the Institute will be reported on in coming issues of NEXUS. Arne Carlsen, Director, UIL.
International directory of lifelong learning policy and research established
The UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning (UIL) has created an online International Directory of Lifelong Learning: Policy and Research. The Directory is a compilation of over 200 governmental departments, institutions and agencies involved in lifelong learning policy and research from 98 UNESCO Member States. These entries have been selected from a total of 268 initial entries proposed by the National Commissions for UNESCO of Member States.
The Directory will serve as a tool to collect information, foster exchange and galvanise regional and international collaboration on lifelong learning policy research and practice...
60 Years of UNESCO Institute in Hamburg
On 24-25 May this year the UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning, UIL, will be celebrating the 60th anniversary of UNESCO’s presence in Hamburg. The anniversary celebration will highlight the Institute’s impact on education policy and programmes throughout the 60 years of its work focussing on lifelong learning, adult learning and education, and adult literacy in all world regions.
What was then the UNESCO Institute for Education was established in Hamburg as part of UNESCO’s commitment in post-war Germany. Now, as UNESCO’s resource centre in lifelong learning, UIL conducts and collates research through its extensive networks to make a case for the achievement of literacy as the foundation of lifelong learning and for the promotion and improvement of youth and adult learning and education as integral parts of lifelong learning. The Institute has had a central advocacy role in promoting the latter by organising the last two international conferences on adult education (CONFINTEA), which take place every 12 years, most recently in Belém, Brazil, in 2009 (CONFINTEA VI).
The international lifelong learning community is cordially invited to attend the anniversary celebrations that will start on 24 May with public lectures on lifelong learning in cooperation with the University of Hamburg, and a dinner reception at UIL’s newly-renovated premises. On 25 May there will be a series of workshops for international or global networks and projects.
60 Years of UNESCO in Hamburg: Public events
The international lifelong learning community and the wider public are cordially invited to attend two public events in cooperation with the University of Hamburg. The first will be a public lecture on “Responding to Global Challenges through Lifelong Learning” on 24 May (see provisional programme). The second event is an international expert seminar on “The Role of Universities in Promoting Lifelong Learning” on 25 May (see provisional programme).
To register for either event, please send a message to email@example.com no later than 30 April.
Arab States - Lifelong learning as a key to social transformation and education in the Middle East and North Africa
Rapid technological changes and the speed of social transformation in the Middle East and North Africa region are confronted with the limits of the existing education system to deal with the needs of youth and adults. Can lifelong learning provision respond to social developments and match demands for a skilled and competent workforce in the labour market?
Against this background, and with the support of the German Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs, UIL and the UNESCO Category II Regional Centre for Education Planning (RCEP) co-organised a Preparatory Seminar from 17 to 19 January at RCEP in Sharjah, United Arab Emirates, on Developing Capacity for Establishing Lifelong Learning Systems in Selected MENA Countries, with participants from Egypt, Kuwait, Palestine, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates.
Key outcomes of the Seminar were proposals on thematic policy and strategy for establishing lifelong learning systems, and on the content of a capacity-building workshop to be held in the region in late 2012.
Videos and PPT files of the Seminar proceedings can be found at http://www.rcepunesco.ae/.
Cedefop is organising in cooperation with the Centre for Research in Employment, Skills & Society (CRESS) a workshop on skill mismatch.
The aim of the workshop is to obtain a clearer insight into the relationship between work-based training, work organisation/human resource policies (e.g. recruitment, training, wage policies and performance appraisals, career development, job design) and skill mismatch within enterprises (see attached background note for a summary of the workshop's aims and objectives).
The objective is to strengthen our understanding of the incidence and impact of mismatch in different types of skills for firm performance, and of the underlying motives and incentives of enterprises with respect to the recruitment, training and career development of mismatched workers. The discussion of the workshop is intended to inform the European Commission’s policy goal of anticipating and matching the skills of the European workforce with the current and future skill needs of enterprises (e.g. Agenda for New Skills and Jobs).
Keynote speakers to the event include Prof. Michael Sattinger (University at Albany, New York) and Prof. Kostas Mavromaras (Flinders University, Adelaide, S. Australia). The workshop will also feature presentations by Dr. S. McGuiness (ESRI), Dr. F. Rycx (University Libre de Bruxelles), Dr. G. Mason (NIESR), Dr. R. Homkes (LSE) and representatives from Eurofound (Dr. M.Curtarelli) and the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) (Dr. A. Baron). A panel discussion session will host Dr. K. Rudiger (CIPD), Dr. W. Mueller (Director, German Federal Employment Agency, European Representation) and Professor K. Mayhew (Oxford University, Director of SKOPE) as speakers. Download Final agenda_Mismatch workshop.
A Call for Stories
Over the past few decades, a variety of critics and advocates have urged colleges and universities to become more directly and deeply engaged in the civic life of their communities and states. Despite widespread perceptions that little has been and is being done in response, thousands of community-university engagement initiatives and projects have been organized across the nation.
What are people doing and accomplishing in these initiatives and projects? How and why were they organized and developed? What kinds of challenges have they involved, and how have people dealt with them? How–if at all–have they contributed to the task of civic renewal, of making democracy work as it should?
Utilizing the under-appreciated craft of storytelling, this new website is a resource for people who wish to explore these and other related questions about higher education’s roles in civic life. Over the next several years we’ll be developing and publishing a set of “practitioner profiles” of people who have been engaged in public work initiatives and projects that feature significant levels of community-university engagement. Practitioner profiles are oral histories of people’s lives, work, and experience that are crafted from the edited transcripts of in-depth interviews. (For samples of practitioner profiles, click here.) The profiles we’ll be developing and publishing on this website will be centered on practice stories of democracy in action at the local community level. In addition to publishing these profiles, we’ll also be offering opportunities for readers to participate in the process of interpreting and making sense of them.
We want your stories! If you have a story to tell about your own community-university engagement work and experience, or if you know of a story that you think others would be interested in hearing, please visit our “Tell Us Your Story” page.
This website is part of an action research initiative on democracy and higher education that is being developed in collaboration with the Kettering Foundation. For an overview of this initiative, click here. Scott Peters, Cornell University, Ted Alter, Penn State University, Tim Shaffer, Cornell University.
The project aims to identify interuniversity cooperation structures, and to assess the added value and limits of their governance and processes in order to draw lessons for the future of the RUOA network.
RUOA underlined that the project would also be an opportunity to build partnerships with other interuniversity cooperation networks and “to contribute to a clearer territorial strategy in higher education and research”. For more information, visit this website.
Created in 2001, the Network of Universities of the Western Atlantic (RUOA) is a center of inter-university cooperation involving 10 universities in these four regions of Brittany, Limousin, Pays de la Loire and Poitou-Charentes.
The network is dedicated to:
- coordinating scientific politics and educational institutions, and cooperation on projects on European level,
- linking up member universities among territories,
- developing research by pooling resources and expertises,
- fostering the emergence of an European identity.
It offers a showcase for the public higher education and research, to promote the development of the reel identity of Western Universities, the guarantee of a dynamic in favor of the common interest.
Common declaration of the 9 presidents of the Network
"Nowadays, great stakes are not defined on an insulated universities scale. While preserving the autonomy and the identity of each one, which are contributing to the unit richness, it is advisable to found new cooperations around common projects, which will give a national and European recognition. The coordination of policies and strategic choices is a key element for the development of higher education and research in the areas of Brittany, Pays de la Loire and Poitou-Charentes. Thus, by synergies which it can impel, the Network must widely contribute to the consolidation of the Grand Ouest European anchorage ."
A new visibility
To give an interregional identity to the offer of higher education and to develop courses of excellence which associate several universities. To allow the poles of research to reach the necessary critic size for important scientific investments and to contribute to the technological development of the ‘Grand Ouest' companies. To place the 10 universities from Atlantic West in a configuration with European dimension and to constitute a choices showcase for a great area with international ambitions.
A cooperation of projects
A shared will to implement joint projects, based on 3 axis of work:
- To equip the universities with a new capacity of communication and cooperation, in the name of scientific and technical development, by the reinforcement of high flow connections and the constitution of a network coordinated at the regional level.
- To develop the e-learning offer, while coordinating and harmonizing the initiatives of ‘e-universities', on a regional scale.
- To work out joint projects which associate several universities of the network, financed by the European community in the perspective of the European regional policy (Interreg III) and the European research policy (6th framework program).
See also Les effets de la VAE sur les parcours professionnels.
Admissions officers, credential evaluators and other recognition experts from higher education institutions in the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) are invited to take part in a survey to provide their feedback on a new ‘recognition’ manual to be developed over the next two years by the European Area of Recognition – a Manual for the Higher Education Institutions (EAR HEI) project.
The EAR HEI project, funded by the European Commission’s Lifelong Learning programme, is being carried out by a consortium led by NUFFIC and consisting of recognition experts and representatives including the European University Association, the Tuning network, the European Students’ Union, the German Rectors’ Conference and the President of the Lisbon Recognition Convention Committee.
The survey will be open until 29 May 2012. To access the survey, click here.
III. Concluding remarks
Discussing ‘quality’ and ‘trust’: an analysis of the EQAF 2011 contributions
By Heinz Lechleiter (Lecturer in Applied Linguistics, former Director of Quality (2005-2010), Dublin City University, Ireland).
The following essay is based on an examination of the abstracts submitted and accepted for the European Quality Assurance Forum 2011 in Antwerp. The bulk of the material presented here was prepared before the EQAF 2011. However, some elements of the papers, workshops, plenary sessions and discussions at the Forum have been incorporated. The essay is a written version of a workshop given at the Forum but the original intention was to present a conference preview to the diverse group of participants (students, institutions, agencies, government and industry representatives, and others) with the aim of creating an overview, of positioning all contributions in the overall context of the Forum, and of highlighting areas for discussion that emerge from the analysis.
Abstracts are an interesting text form. They select, simplify and condense highly complex realities and in doing that include certain aspects of these realities and exclude others, highlight certain aspects and the background of others (cf. Fairclough, 2005, pp. 10). Conference abstracts serve two further purposes: one is “to convince the reviewers that the associated paper should be accepted for presentation at the conference” (Martin-Martin, 2005, p. 6) and the other is to ‘sell’ the paper or workshop described in the abstract to the conference participants and to entice them to attend the corresponding session. For these reasons, the combined abstracts are likely to make up a body of text that captures the current state of development and thinking in the area of quality in higher education.
In the analysis, I seek to show what picture emerges as a result of the necessary simplifications and reductions in the abstracts, point to what is being highlighted, try to reveal what is side-lined, and attempt to crystallise these aspects into points of discussion that may help to advance the debate. It should be noted that some of the Points of Discussion (PoD) are triggered by findings but have been extended to take the wider context into consideration.
The methods used for the analysis were taken from corpus linguistics, text linguistics and critical discourse analysis. Frequency lists and concordances (i.e. clusters of words in their context) were produced by a software application called WordSmith. The abstracts were treated as one text in order to establish emerging patterns but individual abstracts could be traced when necessary. The analysis was carried out in a number of stages which are roughly reflected in the following sections, each leading into a PoD.
First, a simple overview of word frequency was created. Overall, there are 29 abstracts, 24 of these for papers and 5 for workshops. Together they contain 5080 words (tokens), of which 1288 are different words (types). As is always the case, function words such as ‘the’, ‘of’, ‘and’, ‘in’ and ‘to’ top the list by a wide margin; these words may appear negligible but they do contain interesting information and I will come back to one of them (‘on’) in the last section. To begin with, however, we turn our attention to the content words. The most frequent by a wide margin is ‘quality’ in position 6 on the frequency list with 121 occurrences (written as 6/121), followed by ‘education’ (9/60), ‘assurance’ (10/56), ‘higher’ (15/45), and ‘students’ (17/37). In the comparison between ‘teaching’ (65/11) and ‘learning’ (39/18) the latter clearly wins out creating the impression that the shift from an input to an output perspective in higher education is well under way, with all that entails for the academic community (cf. PoD 2). The abstracts mention nearly fi ve times as many ‘problems’ and ‘challenges’ (9) as ‘solutions’ (2); remarkably, both mentions of ‘solutions’ occur in student contributions.
The Forum title Quality and Trust: at the heart of what we do delivers the cue for the next step in the analysis. It puts the words ‘quality’, ‘trust’ and ‘we’ centre-stage and the focus of attention will be on each of them in turn.
It is one of the fundamental principles of text linguistics that words (expressions, grammatical features etc.) can never be looked at in isolation as it is their context and the situation that invests them with their meaning. Therefore we will try to get to know the term ‘quality’ by the company it keeps. In the EQAF 2011 abstracts the word ‘quality’ is combined with ‘assurance’ 55 times. All other combinations are much less frequent; they are with ‘management’ (7); ‘enhancement’, ‘process(es)’, ‘system(s)’ (4 each), and with ‘evaluation’ (3). Two absences need to be noted: neither ‘quality improvement’ (although there is one occurrence of ‘improvement of quality’) nor ‘quality culture’ feature in the abstracts. Taking into consideration that in the conference announcement a direct connection was made between ‘improvement’ and ‘trust’ the absence of the compound ‘quality improvement’ seems to contain a story.
Staying with ‘quality’ but changing the perspective, the next question asked of the abstracts was: the quality of what? There are ten combinations of ‘quality of’. Four of them are single instances of ‘services’, ‘structures’, ‘student experience’ and ‘implemented changes’. The other six can be grouped under the heading of ‘education’ (including ‘teaching’ and ‘course planning’), confi rming the close connection between education and quality. Taken together with the change of emphasis from ‘teaching’ to ‘learning’, from subject-specifi c knowledge to transferable skills, from directed to autonomous learning, a tendency emerges that has consequences both for the role of academics and students. In the discussions at the Forum the possibility of a devaluation of the teaching role was mentioned. The change to a learning focus gives the students a proactive role in the learning process, but how can their role in relation to education be described without reverting to the passive voice?
Next under the linguistic microscope is the term ‘trust’. There are 25 occurrences of the word in all the abstracts, all of them as nouns (as in ‘the trust’, as opposed to ‘we trust’), and with a very uneven distribution. ‘Trust’ appears in only four of the 24 papers (with nine mentions in one paper), whereas it is used in three of the fi ve analysed workshop abstracts. This indicates perhaps not surprisingly, that the workshops are more closely related to the Forum title than the papers. However, it is not only how often but in what way the term ‘trust’ is used that has some revelatory power. It has to do with the presence or absence of trust.
There is a relatively restricted number of words (predominantly verbs) the noun ‘trust’ can be combined with. The words combined with ‘trust’ in the abstracts can be divided into four subgroups. One group has to do with the fostering of existing trust (strengthen, assure, foster, contribute to), another with the creation of trust where it was not previously present (achieve, create, build, establish). All of these verbs can also be easily combined with the term ‘quality’ and have frequently been used in this way. There are two more groups, however, used in combination with ‘trust’ that have to do with loss of trust (reinstate, re-establish, regain; loss) and an outright opposite or antonym (distrust, mistrust; suspiciousness). It is my contention that one would be hard pressed to fi nd examples for instances speaking about the regaining of quality in any of the many institutional or other reports that have been published. Where antonyms are concerned, they can often be helpful in clarifying issues (for example clarifying the meaning of ‘old’ by supplying one of its antonyms ‘new’, ‘young’, or ‘modern’).
It has been the aim of this analysis and interpretation of the conference abstracts to create an overview of the European Quality Assurance Forum 2011 and to enable contributors to the Forum and other interested groups and individuals to survey and map the areas of interest, but also the lesser explored areas, in quality. The analysis has yielded a set of questions that will hopefully advance discussions in the future and will contribute to the development of a quality culture in higher education in Europe and further afield.
Although by no means exhaustive, the analysis is indicative of the potential that the application of a linguistic approach can have in the framework of discussions about quality in higher education and, indeed, elsewhere. Treating the conference abstracts as a valuable resource, it can act both as a mirror, enabling self-refl ection, and as a window, enabling views from the inside out, and from the outside into the world of quality in higher education.
Collins Cobuild, 1990, English Grammar, (Collins, London and Glasgow).
Fairclough, N., 2005, Critical discourse analysis, Marges Linguistiques, 9, pp. 76-94.
Johnson, M., 1989, The body in the mind. The bodily basis of meaning, imagination and reason, (Chicago, University of Chicago Press).
Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M., 1980, Metaphors We Live By, (Chicago, University of Chicago Press).
Martin-Martin, P., 2005, The Rhetoric of the Abstract in English and Spanish Scientific Discourse: A Cross-Cultural Genre-Analytic Approach, (Bern, Peter Lang).
Maslow, A.H., 1943, A Theory of Human Motivation, Psychological Review, 50(4), pp. 370-96.
Download Quality and Trust: at the heart of what we do (6th EQAF).
See also 7th European Quality Assurance Forum - Tallinn, 6th European Quality Assurance Forum - Antwerp, 5th European Quality Assurance Forum (EQAF) - Lyon.
Mode de saisine: Autosaisine. Formation de travail désignée: Section de l'éducation, de la culture et de la communication.
Texte original de la SAISINE SUR REUSSIR LA DEMOCRATISATION DE L’ENSEIGNEMENT SUPERIEUR : L’ENJEU DU PREMIER CYCLE (Décision du Bureau du 13 décembre 2011 NS115010)
Les attentes d’un grand nombre de jeunes, de leurs familles et de la société dans son ensemble au regard des conditions d’accès à l’enseignement supérieur et de réussite des étudiants sont aujourd’hui très fortes. En effet, depuis la fin des années quatre-vingt, l’objectif du baccalauréat et de la poursuite des études est devenu la norme pour une majorité de jeunes français. Cependant, l’impossibilité pour une proportion significative des bacheliers d’accéder à l’enseignement supérieur et les difficultés de nombreux étudiants à trouver leur voie et à passer le cap de la première année sont des facteurs de déception et de forte inquiétude, en particulier dans une période où les niveaux de formation et de qualification sont déterminants tant pour la réussite professionnelle des individus que pour notre avenir collectif.
Dans sa contribution pour le Programme National de Réforme, notre assemblée soulignait combien l’objectif de 50% d’une classe d’âge sortant avec un diplôme de l’enseignement supérieur était négligé. Elle rappelait: « Cet objectif est essentiel en matière de développement économique durable, de citoyenneté, d’accès à la culture et d’emploi. » L’Union européenne, et donc notre pays, a en effet choisi de rechercher un très haut niveau de qualification de sa population comme une des principales garanties de la prospérité et de la cohésion sociale futures.
Or, avec environ 40% de jeunes diplômés de l’enseignement supérieur par génération, nous sommes encore loin du compte. Non seulement, cette proportion n’augmente pas mais elle tend aujourd’hui à régresser (les sortants avec un diplôme de l’enseignement supérieur ont représenté 43% des cohortes 2002-2004 et 41% des cohortes 2005-2007).
Comme le soulignait la contribution au PNR, cette question renvoie bien sûr à la stagnation du pourcentage de jeunes atteignant le niveau baccalauréat mais elle invite aussi à interroger le fonctionnement de notre enseignement supérieur et singulièrement des Universités. La difficulté actuelle d’accueillir un plus grand nombre d’étudiants, de bien les former, d’assurer leur réussite et leur insertion professionnelle est sans doute un des principaux points aveugles des réformes institutionnelles intervenues ces dernières années.
Or l’échec intervient massivement dans le premier cycle: 33% des étudiants du supérieur quittent la filière initiale d’inscription à l’issue de la première ou de la deuxième année et 19% sortent sans diplôme autre que le baccalauréat. Par ailleurs, la réussite des étudiants connaît des différences importantes selon les voies dont ils sont issus, au bénéfice essentiellement du baccalauréat général. Ainsi, en 2009, le taux de réussite à la licence en trois ans, à l’Université, était de 44% pour les bacheliers généraux et de 10% pour les bacheliers technologiques. Le taux de réussite aux BTS en deux ans était de 77% pour les bacheliers généraux, de 57% pour les bacheliers technologiques et seulement de 40% pour les bacheliers professionnels.
Cette situation nécessite que soient interrogées les politiques mises en oeuvre dans l’enseignement supérieur et notamment le plan licence et les financements des établissements. Les modalités de la prise en charge pédagogique des étudiants, de leur suivi et de leur encadrement en premier cycle feront l’objet d’un examen approfondi tout comme celles de leurs conditions de vie et d’études. Il importera aussi d’analyser l’offre de formation, le contenu, l’organisation des diplômes de premier cycle et la prise en compte de la préparation à la vie professionnelle. Enfin, les conditions d’une meilleure valorisation des activités d’enseignement dans les politiques universitaires seront envisagées comme un aspect essentiel de cette première étape de la réflexion.
Le questionnement doit également porter sur l'organisation de l'enseignement supérieur et de ses différentes filières (Université, CPGE, IUT, STS, apprentissage...) sur leur implantation territoriale et leur accessibilité.
Il importe de façon complémentaire que l'on examine l'articulation du lycée et de ses différentes voies avec l'enseignement supérieur et l'orientation des lycéens, en accordant une attention particulière aux évolutions de ces dernières années mais aussi en se penchant sur les phénomènes d’interruption et de reprise d'études. L’information, les systèmes d’orientation et les critères de choix des jeunes dans l’enseignement supérieur seront au centre de cette problématique.
Le sujet implique enfin une analyse sur l’aval du premier cycle, que ce soit sur la conception des masters ou l'insertion professionnelle et la carrière des jeunes diplômés.
Le Bureau a décidé de confier à la section de l’éducation, de la culture et de la communication la préparation d’un rapport et d’un avis sur cette question qui pourrait faire l’objet d’une présentation en séance plénière au cours du premier semestre 2012.
Questions à M. Jean-Louis MUCCHIELLI, Directeur général de la Direction générale de l'enseignement supérieur et de l'insertion professionnelle (DGESIP), auditionné par la Section de l'éducation, de la culture et de la communication dans le cadre de la préparation de son avis intitulé: "Réussir la démocratisation de l’enseignement supérieur - l’enjeu du premier cycle". Voir la vidéo.
Questions à Louis Vogel.
Questions à M. Louis VOGEL, Président de la Conférence des Présidents d’Université (CPU), auditionné par la Section de l'éducation, de la culture et de la communication dans le cadre de l'avis intitulé : "Réussir la démocratisation de l’enseignement supérieur : l’enjeu du premier cycle". Voir la vidéo.
Voir aussi Les formations par apprentissage: un outil au service d’une démocratisation de l’enseignement supérieur, Accès à l'enseignement supérieur en France : une démocratisation réelle mais de faible ampleur.
Le Bureau du Conseil a décidé de confier à la section de l’éducation, de la culture et de la communication la préparation d’un rapport et d’un avis sur cette question qui pourrait faire l’objet d’une présentation en séance plénière au cours du premier semestre 2012.
Dans sa dernière contribution pour le Programme National de Réforme, notre assemblée soulignait combien l’objectif de 50 % d’une classe d’âge sortant avec un diplôme de l’enseignement supérieur était négligé. Elle rappelait : « Cet objectif est essentiel en matière de développement économique durable, de citoyenneté, d’accès à la culture et d’emploi. ».
Or, avec environ 40% de jeunes diplômés de l’enseignement supérieur par génération, nous sommes encore loin du compte. Non seulement, cette proportion n’augmente pas mais elle tend aujourd’hui à régresser (les sortants avec un diplôme de l’enseignement supérieur ont représenté 43% des cohortes 2002-2004 et 41% des cohortes 2005-2007).
Cette question renvoie bien sûr à la stagnation du pourcentage de jeunes atteignant le niveau baccalauréat mais elle invite aussi à interroger le fonctionnement de notre enseignement supérieur et singulièrement des Universités. La difficulté actuelle d’accueillir un plus grand nombre d’étudiants, de bien les former, d’assurer leur réussite et leur insertion professionnelle est sans doute un des principaux points aveugles des réformes institutionnelles intervenues ces dernières années.
Or l’échec intervient massivement dans le premier cycle: 33% des étudiants du supérieur quittent la filière initiale d’inscription à l’issue de la première ou de la deuxième année et 19% sortent sans diplôme autre que le baccalauréat.
Par ailleurs, la réussite des étudiants connaît des différences importantes selon les voies dont ils sont issus, au bénéfice essentiellement du baccalauréat général.
Ainsi, en 2009, le taux de réussite à la licence en trois ans, à l’Université, était de 44% pour les bacheliers généraux et de 10% pour les bacheliers technologiques. Le taux de réussite aux BTS en deux ans était de 77% pour les bacheliers généraux, de 57% pour les bacheliers technologiques et seulement de 40% pour les bacheliers professionnels.
Le CESE souhaite donc réfléchir sur les politiques mises en œuvre dans l’enseignement supérieur et notamment le plan licence et les financements des établissements.
Les modalités de la prise en charge pédagogique des étudiants, de leur suivi et de leur encadrement en premier cycle feront l’objet d’un examen approfondi tout comme celles de leurs conditions de vie et d’études.
Il importera aussi d’analyser l’offre de formation, le contenu, l’organisation des diplômes de premier cycle et la prise en compte de la préparation à la vie professionnelle. Enfin, les conditions d’une meilleure valorisation des activités d’enseignement dans les politiques universitaires seront envisagées comme un aspect essentiel de cette première étape de la réflexion.
Le questionnement doit également porter sur l'organisation de l'enseignement supérieur et de ses différentes filières (Université, CPGE, IUT, STS, apprentissage...) sur leur implantation territoriale et leur accessibilité. Il importe de façon complémentaire que l'on examine l'articulation du lycée et de ses différentes voies avec l'enseignement supérieur et l'orientation des lycéens, en accordant une attention particulière aux évolutions de ces dernières années mais aussi en se penchant sur les phénomènes d’interruption et de reprise d'études.
L’information, les systèmes d’orientation et les critères de choix des jeunes dans l’enseignement supérieur seront au centre de cette problématique. Le sujet implique enfin une analyse sur l’aval du premier cycle, que ce soit sur la conception des masters ou l'insertion professionnelle et la carrière des jeunes diplômés.
Mode henvisning: Self-henvisning. Dannelse af udpegede arbejde: Sektion for Uddannelse, Kultur og Kommunikation.
Oprindelig tekst af succesen REFERENCE Demokratisering af VIDEREGÅENDE UDDANNELSER: Udstedelsen af den første runde (Præsidiets afgørelse af 13 December 2011 NS115010)
Forventningerne til mange unge, deres familier og samfundet som helhed i form af betingelser for adgang til videregående uddannelser og studerende succes er meget høje i dag. Siden slutningen af firserne, har formålet med bachelor-og videreuddannelse bliver normen for et flertal af ung fransk. Men den manglende evne af en betydelig andel af kandidater at få adgang til højere uddannelse og de vanskeligheder, mange studerende finder vej og se ud over det første år er faktorer af skuffelse og stor bekymring, især på et tidspunkt, hvor niveauet af uddannelse og kvalifikationer er afgørende for både den professionelle succes, den enkelte og for vores fælles fremtid. Mere...