24 novembre 2012

Older people's learning is changing: new survey from NIACE
Older people’s learning is showing a big increase in independent and online learning alongside a significant decline in those learning at college or university. This is the headline finding of a major new survey of learning and the over 50s published by NIACE on Monday 19 November.
While the proportion of people aged 50 and over who report that they are engaged in learning has not changed since the last survey in 2005, the numbers learning at college or university have halved, while the numbers learning independently and online have risen.
Other main findings of the report – Older People’s Learning in 2012 - which will be officially launched at a European Conference in Brussels later today, include:

• A dramatic drop in the proportion of older people learning about ‘computing’, from over 40 per cent in 2005 to just 17 per cent in 2012.
• A rise in people using computers for learning – 12 per cent of those aged 50 and over are ‘learning online’.
• Older people are much less likely than younger people to be learning - only one in five over 50s are ‘learners’, compared to two in five of the adult population as a whole. The proportion falls to only 7 per cent of those aged 75 and over.
• The numbers reporting learning independently have risen dramatically. 16 per cent of people aged 50 and over now report learning, ‘Independently on my own’, and a further 9 per cent ‘Independently with others’. The former figure rises to nearly 30 per cent of learners aged 75 and over (mainly better educated and with internet access), while the latter rises to 14per cent.
• The proportion studying in further education colleges and universities has halved since 2005 (from 21 per cent to 9 per cent in colleges and from 14 per cent to 8 per cent in universities).
• More than a quarter of older people say that learning has helped them to pass on skills and knowledge to others. ‘Getting involved in society’ and ‘improving my health’ were also frequently reported (14 per cent and 13 per cent). ‘Getting involved in the digital world’, was a benefit for 10 per cent of respondents, and significant numbers reported that it had helped them to manage caring roles and to cope with life crises.
• Among the oldest learners (the over 75s) ‘To meet people’, and, ‘Because friends/family/colleagues are also learning’, were cited as the most important reasons for learning.
• Two-thirds of those who have not learned in the last three years say that it is ‘very unlikely’ that they will do so in the future, and the proportion rises with age. When asked, two-thirds of these ‘non-learners’ said nothing would make learning more attractive.

The report's author, Professor Stephen McNair, Senior Research Fellow at NIACE, said:
“There has been a transformation in older people's learning over the last seven years. This survey shows, for the first time, how complex and important the benefits of learning are for older people. Learning, for them, is not just about pursuing interests. It helps them to stay involved in society, to maintain their health, to manage caring roles and to cope with life crises.”
“However, if older people's learning continues to move out of public institutions and into people's homes and independent groups, we will need to monitor how effective it remains in tackling inequalities in society. Finally, we have seen a major change in older people's access to, and use of, computers. Compared to seven years ago, the over 50s are now much less likely to be learning about computers, and more likely to be using them for learning.”
Download the full report of Older People's Learning 2012.

Apprendimento permanente e riconoscimento dell’apprendimento pregresso, Firenze 23 novembre 2012
Campagna di informazione sul Processo di Bologna 2011-2013
Seminario nazionale su
Apprendimento permanente e riconoscimento dell’apprendimento pregresso in collaborazione con la Rete di Università Italiane per l’Apprendimento Permanente (RUIAP)
23 novembre 2012
Università degli Studi di Firenze
Aula Magna - Piazza S. Marco 4

• Programma
• Scaduti i termini di iscrizione 

L'Università di Firenze segnala: Strutture alberghiere in convenzione.
La prossima assemblea della RUIAP si svolgera' presso l' Università degli Studi di Firenze il giorno 22 novembre 2012.
Questo sito, costruito con la collaborazione dell'Agenzia Nazionale LLP/Erasmus costituisce uno degli strumenti adottati dai Promotori di Bologna italiani per la diffusione delle informazioni sul Processo di Bologna nell'ambito del mondo accademico italiano.
Riportiamo in questa prima sezione una breve presentazione del Processo di Bologna e dello Spazio Europeo dell’Istruzione Superiore in generale, che dovrebbe costituire una lettura preliminare per chi intenda accostarsi al tema senza averlo precedentemente approfondito o desideri un documento breve da utilizzare per un'informazione di base all'interno del proprio Ateneo.

By Sophie Arkoudis, Chi Baik, Simon Marginson and Elizabeth Cassidy. Internationalising the student experience in Australian tertiary education: Developing criteria and indicators, prepared for Australian Education International

Australian higher education is grappling with the issue of enhancing interaction between domestic and international students to enhance the student experience and the teaching/learning opportunities available through such interaction. While universities have attempted to address this issue in a number of ways, survey results appear to indicate that many international students anticipate levels of interaction with Australian domestic students that are not realised and other research suggests that both groups often remain largely segmented inside and outside classrooms. Similar issues, though less well documented, have arisen in VET.
To date, efforts to improve the interaction between international and domestic students have been mostly isolated from teaching and learning and mostly focused on activities outside the classroom. A key premise of this project is that positive aspects of student experience and teaching/learning opportunities that are available in an international education context offer a combined benefit to both domestic and international students.
Introduction
In mid 2011 Australia Education International provided support to the Centre for the Study of Higher Education (CSHE), University of Melbourne to develop criteria and indicators for monitoring and evaluating the internationalisation of the student experience, which could be used internally by universities to monitor and evaluate their activities and to identify priority areas for improvement. The project developed these criteria and indicators through consultation with the tertiary education sector in three National Forums.
Australian higher education is grappling with the issue of enhancing interaction between domestic and international students to enhance the student experience and the teaching/learning opportunities available through such interaction. While universities have attempted to address this issue in a number of ways, survey results appear to indicate that many international students anticipate levels of interaction with Australian domestic students that are not realised and other research suggests that both groups often remain largely segmented inside and outside classrooms. Similar issues, though less well documented, have arisen in VET.
To date, efforts to improve the interaction between international and domestic students have been mostly isolated from teaching and learning and mostly focused on activities outside the classroom. A key premise of this project is that positive aspects of student experience and teaching/learning opportunities that are available in an international education context offer a combined benefit to both domestic and international students.
Nonetheless, this area is complicated by a lack of agreement on the definition of terms such as ‘internationalisation’ and ‘intercultural teaching and learning’. Also, although many would agree that a key objective of enhanced international and domestic student interaction is to develop ‘global citizens’ there is little agreement on the key characteristics and capabilities of such a ‘global citizen’. This then complicates how progress towards such an intangible goal can be measured or tracked over time. Hence, it remains difficult to identify when systems and institutions are moving forward and where examples of high quality performance can be found.
What is currently missing is an agreed set of criteria for measuring the internationalisation of the student experience. This project attempts to achieve this within a narrow focus on enhancing the interaction between domestic and international students. The indicator framework developed includes numerical indicators where these are meaningful and can be agreed and made operational. Other aspects of internationalisation were found to be less easy to quantify and can only be evaluated through the process of expert judgement on the basis of standard criteria.
Concluding Comments
The next section presents the dimensions, criteria and indicators that were refined after the National Forums. The project team sought written feedback from those who participated in the Forums and the responses received were in general agreement with the items in the document. The project team sought to further strengthen the validity of the framework by asking two universities to pilot the indicator framework by offering examples of data that was available from their institution.
This was a difficult activity for them to complete for two main reasons. Firstly, it was apparent that the institutions did not routinely collect information related to internationalising the student experience (which confirmed general comments made in the Forums). Secondly, the administrative activities (for which data might be collected) of institutions’ international offices are most often focused upon recruitment of international students, rather than internationalisation in terms of student experience and teaching/learning outcomes.
From the experience of this project, it seems clear that educational institutions need an integrated approach to internationalising the student experience that includes:
- a strategic approach towards achieving agreed outcomes;
- better articulation of relevant teaching and learning strategies; and
- a communication strategy that engages the university community.
The dimensions, criteria and indicators developed as part of this project can guide and assist institutions in developing such an integrated approach – but at the present time such an indicator framework can only be considered somewhat visionary in anticipation of institutions developing common strategies that are specifically focused upon internationalising the student experience in Australian higher education.
Dimensions, criteria and indicators for internationalising the student experience Definition of internationalisation: We need an agreed definition of internationalisation that both highlights the transformative nature of the concept and foregrounds the involvement of all students – international and domestic – in strategies designed to implement and achieve that transformation. The National Forums and subsequent feedback and discussion have been especially insistent that internationalisation is a matter for all students.
* In terms of process ‘internationalisation’ means fostering a nationally and culturally diverse and interactive university community where all students have a sense of belonging.
* In terms of outcomes ‘internationalisation’ means graduates who are globally aware, globally competent and able to work with culturally and linguistically diverse people either locally or anywhere in the world.
Discussion in the Forums also emphasised that every institution is working in a distinctive context. The definitions, criteria and indicators are instruments of self-regulation. Therefore as a matter of course they will be interpreted and used in a manner sensitive to the particular mission, location and student mix in each institution. Download Internationalising the student experience in Australian tertiary education: Developing criteria and indicators.

The 15th EU-China Summit of September 2012 and its Joint Press Communiqué stressed the role of language and multilingualism as an important field of cooperation between China and the EU.
With trade, economic cooperation and political relations between China and Europe on the rise, the role of language and language education appears crucial. Despite the existence of language barriers and hindrances in improving the situation in the field, investing in language education can be mutually beneficial on many different levels.
EU-China language cooperation has developed rapidly over the last decade. In addition to other study and language programmes, more than 2000 Chinese students have benefited from Erasmus Mundus grants to study in the EU, while the Chinese government now yearly provides 200 scholarships for European students to come study Chinese at Universities in China. Moreover, EU-China language cooperation programmes have been praised for their effectiveness in raising mutual understanding and are extremely valuable in further developing EU-China relations and people-to-people interactions.
In order to identify challenges, bottlenecks and opportunities for Chinese language education in Europe, the “EU-China Language Forum” conference was organised by the EIAS on 16 October 2012 together with the Chinese Youth Federation in Europe. The Forum analysed and explored potential policy measures and practical means to improve language education, cooperation and bilateral relations between China and Europe. The event was chaired by EIAS Board Member, Mr Glyn Ford, and joined by four distinguished speakers. The keynote addresses were given by Mr Viorel Isticioaia-Budura, Managing Director for Asia and the Pacific of the European External Action Service, and by H.E Mr Zhang Lirong, Minister and Deputy Head of Mission of the Mission of the People’s Republic of China to the EU. In addition, Mr Wim Haagdorens, Lecturer at the Artesis Hogeschool in Antwerp, and Ms Jie Hu, Deputy Secretary-General of the Chinese Youth Federation in Europe, provided their views and analysis on the topic.
Download Full Text: EIAS_Event_Report_2012-10-16_EU-China_Language_Forum.pdf
Publication Series: Event Report
Additional Material: Presentation_language_forum_Wim_Haagdorens_Demystifying_China.pdf, Speech_HE_Zhang_Lirong_EU-CHina_Language_Forum

• CELAN Final Workshop Wolfgang Mackiewicz
• CELAN Final Workshop Gustavo Gonzales
• CELAN Final Workshop Christian Galinski
• CELAN Final Workshop Mike Hammersley
• CELAN Final Workshop Margaretha Mazura
• CELAN Final Workshop Gerald Lobermeier

The beta version of a needs assessment tool is available now. Any feed-back is highly appreciated to letter-box@emfs.eu.

The conference will take place 22-24 May 2013, in Prague, Czech Republic, and the full title is “Ethnographies of higher education – researching and reflecting ‘at home’”.
Keynote speakers for the conference include Wesley Shumar (Drexel University); Paul Trowler (Lancaster University); Susan Wright (Aarhus University).
Outline from the organisers: In recent years there has been a surge of interest in ethnographic studies of higher education. Not only are anthropologists turning their attention to the study of higher education but also higher education researchers from various theoretical and methodological backgrounds are employing ethnography as a valuable approach to studying multiple facets, sites, and themes of higher education, be it the formation and enactment of governance and policies, knowledge practices, learning and teaching, identities, or academics’ and students’ lives. At the same time, the conference recognizes significant changes in the field of higher education today that are globally transforming not only the social, material and technological conditions and institutional frameworks of knowledge production, transmission and translation, but also affecting the very modes of knowing. We believe ethnographic approaches are a key research strategy for understanding these changes.
The call for papers has been issued, and the deadline for abstracts is 15th of January. The organisers have set three thematic areas that are not exchaustive: politics, positionality and engagement; diversity of the field and comparative practices; ethnographic effects.
More information on both the theme and practical aspects about paper submission can be found on the conference website, or by downloading the call for papers (pdf) here.

By Jessica Stannard, Credential evaluation Consultant at Nuffic, the Netherlands. After a very intensive two and a half days, the course (‘How to Overcome the Challenges of Credential Evaluation’) offered by my co-presenter Duncan Hamshere and myself at the EAIE Academy in Porto came to a successful end on Wednesday afternoon. What type of people sign up for this course, and what exactly do they hope to learn? Most of the participants work in admissions at higher education institutions, and are responsible for evaluating the educational files of students from all over the world who are seeking admission to bachelor’s or master’s programmes.
This year, we had 15 participants working in six different countries. Several of the participants had a limited amount of experience in credential evaluation, while others have been involved in the field for several years.
Our goal as trainers was to provide participants with a thorough impression of the specific issues they will be confronted with when looking at foreign educational documents, and how to address these issues in a way that is considered to be fair and consistent. That may sound simple, but in a field which is not an exact science, where credential evaluators are required to make judgment calls on a daily basis, it is one of the major challenges we face. The good news is, we are not alone. We not only have the guidelines for good practice described in the Lisbon Recognition Convention and the European Area of Recognition Manual, but the real advantage of a training course is that we can benefit from the face-to-face exchange of information and experiences with colleagues in the same field.
On day one of the training course we covered most of the nuts and bolts of credential recognition, such as how differences among educational systems can be the source of error and confusion, (does a German Diplom-Kauffrau prepare the student for a job in a kiosk selling magazines or a career as corporate manager?), how to apply the criteria and procedures of the Lisbon Recognition Convention in daily practice, and the importance of accreditation and recognition to the field. During the afternoon, participants discussed in small groups various ways they could streamline the evaluation process in their offices, to help them cope with working in a pressurized environment. To encourage them to set priorities, they were asked to identify the most essential information about an applicant and his or her educational system that was needed to do an evaluation, and what resources they used most often to find this information.
During the morning of the second day, participants worked in small groups on a number of practice files from a variety of countries, requiring them to look up information, to discuss among themselves how they would evaluate the credential and, most importantly, why they came to a specific decision. For each case study, we discussed if the credential would be given full recognition (no ‘substantial differences’), partial recognition, or no recognition at all (the bachelor’s degree from a diploma mill was the only one that received no recognition at all). During the afternoon, our colleague from the Swedish National Agency for Higher Education, Cecilia George, gave a very informative presentation on evaluating credentials from Cameroon, Nigeria and Ethiopia. In her presentation, Cecilia also included useful information on how to fight fraud, mentioning from which countries and institutions we can receive official transcripts as well as some linguistic features to look out for (Tip: a Nigerian transcript should be signed for the registrar and not by the registrar).
On the last day of the workshop, Duncan gave an illuminating presentation on fraudulent documents, which is of course a subject of great interest and concern to everyone involved in international recognition. While introducing the topic with the announcement that “crime does pay”, based on the billions of dollars earned in the production of false documents of various kinds, in the course of the morning we were also presented with numerous tips and concrete examples on how to detect and combat fraud. The most important weapon we have at our disposal is our familiarity with standard educational documents from individual countries, and knowing what to expect regarding the right signatures, proper seals, coats of arms, layout and terminology. A great deal of fraud can fortunately be discovered with just a little bit of extra effort.
Based on the reactions of the participants both during as well as at the end of the training course, Duncan and I have no doubts it will prove to be a valuable learning experience. As with many intensive, hands-on courses, the usefulness of the information presented will become especially obvious when participants are back at their desks, confronted with credentials and possible evaluation issues discussed during our workshop. Hopefully the guidelines presented will prove beneficial when they are deciding how to proceed.

If Europe is not to lose out to global competition in the fields of education, research and innovation, national higher education systems must be able to respond effectively to the requirements of the knowledge economy.
Europe 2020, the EU's growth strategy for the coming decade, highlights higher education as a key policy area where collaboration between the EU and Member States can deliver positive results for jobs and economic development. In this context, Member States agreed a target that 40% of young people (aged 30-34) should have a higher education qualification or equivalent by 2020.

The European Commission has published a statement today calling on authorities and organisations in Member States to do more to promote the benefits of lifelong learning, active ageing and intergenerational solidarity.