Formation Continue du Supérieur

The month of July brought new developments in the UK, the US and New Zealand for one and the same matter – their fight against bogus international student applicants.
The UK Border Agency announced the toughening of its visa regime for oversees student applicants as of 30 July this year. As an addition to the current selection and visa application procedure, the UKBA announced that, starting this date, it will perform between 10 000 and 14 000 compulsory interview tests over the coming year as a means to better filter our bogus applicants, i.e. those that want to enter the UK with a student visa but without the intention to study or without having the right credentials. It is estimated that about 5% of those coming every year to the UK from outside Europe will be interviewed in this fashion. UKBA will thus gain new powers and will be able to refuse grating visas to students whose credibility remains questionable after the interview round. This announcement came after the results of a pilot scheme recently completed were announced and identified some important gaps in the existing system. 2 300 student visa applicants from 47 countries have been interviewed under this trial by consular officials at 13 posts abroad. The UKBA staff were able to turn down 17% of these applicants on grounds that they lacked basic language skills, and reported they had doubts about the genuineness of another 32%, to whom they would have refused the visas, had they had the power to do so. Most problems were registered with applicants from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Burma, Nigeria and the Philippines. The expectation is that applicants from these countries will be the prime target for the forthcoming interviews. Clearly, the new measure makes university and college representatives unhappy, as they fear that it will further discourage good applicants to target the UK as a study destination.
In parallel, in New Zealand, the random check of a sample of student visa applicants has uncovered immigration fraud at the Beijing branch of Immigration New Zealand (INZ). The fraud consists mainly in fake qualifications and fake bank statements, and concerns 279 applicants, 231 of which were already in the country. The fake students were enrolled at 20 higher education providers in the Auckland area. However, the providers had, according to the results of the investigation, nothing to do with the fraud. The latter seems to have been facilitated by two agents in China, but the investigation is ongoing. The fraudulent applicants will be, once identified and located, deported back to China.
Last but not least, a recently released report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) in the US points to serious flaws in the procedures used by the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency to “investigate, identify and combat fraud” in the framework of the Student and Exchange Visitor Program, which it manages. GAO concludes that ICE has “not done enough to ensure that the 10 000 schools and colleges that enrolled a total of 850 000 foreign students as of January have done so legitimately”. The report points to a number of problems including accreditation and puts forward recommendations, which have already been approved by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
UKBA.
Times Higher Education.
New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.
United States Government Accountability Office.

In mid-July, the European Commission made available  two reports about the Erasmus Mundus Programme (EM). One of the reports, entitled Experience and lessons learnt from the first generation of EMMC, presents the analysis of 36 individual assessments of final reports submitted by first generation Erasmus Mundus Master Courses (EMMC), selected in 2004 and 2005. The other one is a survey report of the combined Cluster on Sustainability and Recognition of Degrees and Joint Degrees project. Drawing on the experience of previous EM projects, both reports aim to identify existing good practices, as well as difficulties faced by EM study programmes.
Examples of best practices presented in the first report cover areas such as programme management, quality assurance, engagement of external actors, promotion and recruitment, and funding. Apart from best practices, it also challenges some myths such as ‘the more partners the merrier’. It was found, for example, that partners in large consortia risk under-enrollment at a certain stage and also that a graduate certificate with multiple seals for a single study period tends to invite more suspicion rather than trust from potential employers.
Both reports conclude that much work is needed to improve the recognition of EM degrees. Despite the reputation of the Erasmus Mundus Programme, there is no such a thing as an ‘Erasmus Mundus Degree’ awarded by a centralised ‘authoritative’ body. Differences in national legislations, institutional administrative regulations, and in academic ‘scoring cultures’, have prevented the award of joint degrees for 19 out of the 36 first-generation EM consortia.
Finally, both reports express doubt about the sustainability of EM study programmes without the funding support of the European Commission. The ‘reputation capital’ earned by some established EM programmes and sustained through the Erasmus Mundus Brand Name programme have enabled some EM programmes to attract students without relying on funding from the European Union. However, the costs of maintaining a high quality and well networked international programme, pose high financial risks for the institutions, especially in time of budgetary constraints.
The first report was prepared by four independent experts: Lucia Franchi, Sylvia Gómez-Ansón, Michel Jouve and Frank Wilson and the second by Ecorys UK Ltd. Both are available on the website of the Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA).
European Commission: Experience and lessons learnt from the first generation of EMMC .
European Commission: Survey Report - Cluster on Sustainability and Recognition of Degrees and Joint Degrees.
Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA).

ACA is pleased to announce that its 2011 Annual Report has just become available for download on the ACA website. The website also gives access to all previous annual reports starting from the year 2000. The 2011 report provides a thorough overview of all key activities of ACA over the past calendar year. ACA’s membership developments, project activities, publications, seminars and conferences, governance issues, staffing and financial information are all covered in detail in this seventeen-page retrospective.
To receive print copies of the report, please write to the ACA Secretariat directly. Download Annual Report 2011.
Annual Report 2011
In 2011, ACA was delighted to admit three fine organisations as new members: Agence Europe-Education-Formation France (2e2f): Created in 2000, 2e2f serves as France’s National Agency for the Lifelong Learning Programme, as well as the National Contact Point for Erasmus Mundus, Tempus, the Bologna Experts French Team, Europass and Euroguidance. The Bordeaux-based agency manages all aspects of the European programmes for which it is responsible; it also liaises with national organisations in the fields of education and vocational training and organises many conferences, seminars and workshops.
Foundation for the Development of the Education System (FRSE): FRSE serves as Poland’s National Agency for the Lifelong Learning Programme, the National Structure of the Erasmus Mundus Programme, and the National Contact Point for Tempus. Since its founding in 1993, FRSE has administered the main European education programmes and been involved in national efforts to modernise the education system, particularly with regard to quality and competitiveness. It has also promoted the Polish higher education system abroad.
Foundation for Federal Co-operation: Headquartered in Solothurn, the CH Foundation (as it is more commonly known) is an inter-cantonal organisation with members from all 26 Swiss cantons. It was created in 1967 and has for many years been engaged in efforts to support national and international educational, cultural and linguistic exchange and mobility activities. Since 2011, the CH Foundation also acts as the Swiss National Agency for the Lifelong Learning Programme.
Mapping Mobility in European Higher Education
2011 saw the much-awaited conclusion of Mapping mobility in European higher education, one of ACA’s largest and most complex projects of the last few years. Work on this European Commission-funded study was initiated in October 2009 and focused on two primary lines of inquiry. First, through an analysis of existing data from EUROSTAT, OECD and UNESCO’s Institute of Statistics, the project sought to provide a clear picture of the volume and patterns of student (and to a lesser extent staff) mobility into, out of and between the so-called Europe 32 countries over a recent ten-year period. “Europe 32” in the context of this study, consists of those countries covered by the EU’s Lifelong Learning Programme: the 27 EU Member States, the four European Free Trade Association states (Iceland, Lichtenstein, Norway and Switzerland), and Turkey. Second, the project aimed to assess the adequacy of the international data stock – and the approaches to its collection – with regard to the mobility phenomenon in the Europe 32 countries.
ACA served as the coordinator of the project, in close collaboration with Ulrich Teichler of INCHER at the University of Kassel. The work also benefitted from significant contributions by Campus France and DAAD (both ACA member organisations), as well as HIS (a German social science research institute). A number of researchers connected to Professor Teichler also participated in this mammoth exercise, which involved extensive analysis of both quantitative information and contextual considerations across the 32 very diverse countries covered by the study.
The final two-volume report provides amongst other things:
• a state of the art picture of student mobility into, out of and between the Europe 32 countries, on the criteria of both nationality and country of prior education/residence (‘real mobility’); it also features an historical account of this information (time series), displaying the major mobility trends
• in-depth studies of student mobility in 11 EU countries
• a critical assessment of the present state of international data collection and analysis, with recommendations for improved practice in the future
• a state of the art picture, including a historical dimension, of student mobility in European programmes (mainly Erasmus)
• a presentation of the (few) available data on staff mobility in Europe, as well as a suggested methodology for future data collection in this area
• an analysis of national policies for international mobility in all 32 countries covered by the study
• recommendations to boost student and staff mobility in Europe.
The full text of this epic report was made available on the European Commission’s website in autumn 2011. DAAD also graciously provided support for the publication of a hard copy version of the study, which came out in its Dok&Mat series in December 2011.
Study on European and National Mobility Policies (ENPMOB)
Over the course of 2011, ACA devoted significant resources to the completion of the Study on European and National Mobility Policies (ENPMOB). This project, initiated in November 2010, was dedicated to the exploration and analysis of mobility policies and strategies at both the European level and in the same 32 countries covered in Mapping Mobility in European Higher Education project (see previous section).
Building on the quantitative foundation laid by Mapping Mobility, ENPMOB has aimed to make sense of the concrete set of objectives, instruments, responsible actors, monitoring actions, and timeline specifications for mobility articulated in the study countries and within the broader EU framework. This work was made possible by funding from the ERASMUS Programme’s ‘Accompanying Measures’. ACA served as project coordinator and worked closely with colleagues from Nuffic and DAAD to realise the project’s goals.
ENPMOB’s final report is due in early 2012 and will provide a substantial contribution to ACA’s body of work focused on international mobility. This will include a macro-level comparison of the mobility policies of the 32 Lifelong Learning Programme countries and the European Union itself. There will be a historical account and analysis of the evolution of EU mobility policies over the past 25 years as well as in-depth presentation of the national mobility policies in eight European countries – Austria, Cyprus, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Romania, Spain and the United Kingdom.
A central consideration within the study is the question of convergence or divergence. That is to say, the final report will endeavour to shed light on the fundamental issue of if, how and to what degree national and European-level policies are exerting an effect on one another. There will also be attention paid to the alignment (or lack thereof) between stated policy objectives and the ‘real world’, in the form of discernible mobility trends and the practical application of steering instruments. The final report will be published in ACA’s own monograph series, the ACA Papers on International Cooperation in Education.
Indicators for Mapping and Profiling Internationalisation (IMPI)
Building on its core expertise in the area of internationalisation, ACA in 2011 continued to play an active role in the on-going IMPI project, which was launched in 2009. Coordinated by CHE Consult GmbH (Centre for Higher Education Development) in Germany, Indicators for Mapping and Profiling Internationalisation is a three-year project funded by the European Commission. ACA members CampusFrance, NUFFIC, Perspektywy and SIU are also core partners in this work, which is focused on the development and testing of a set of internationalisation indicators that can be used by European higher education institutions through the medium of an online interactive “toolkit”. The indicators allow both for self-assessment of different dimensions of internationalisation by individual institutions, or they can be used for a coordinated benchmarking exercise among groups of institutions.
In 2011, ACA took the lead on a variety of IMPI-related activities, principally focused on guiding the team of core partners (and 20 participating higher education institutions from across Europe) through an in-depth testing phase of the indicators. Key activities included oversight of two day-long workshops—one in Vienna in May, the second in Copenhagen in September—as well as the convening of an external experts’ meeting in Brussels in April, which provided important feedback on the project’s achievements to that point, and its on-going development.
The IMPI project is due to be completed in 2012. ACA will be a central actor until the end, hosting the project’s final symposium in Brussels in May 2012.
Mapping “mobility windows ” in European higher education. Examples from selected countries (MOwin)
October 2011 saw the launch of MOWIN, a project led by ACA and developed in partnership with ACA’s Finnish member, CIMO, as well as HIS, a German social science research institute. MOWIN is funded by the Lifelong Learning Programme and its objective is to ‘unpack’ the concept of “mobility windows”, an increasingly popular instrument for integrating study abroad periods into higher education programming. The project will have a lifespan of two years and, among other things, aims to provide a robust working definition of the (often vague) term “mobility window”, create an inventory and a typology of the different types of “windows”, and investigate how different mobility window models are implemented in a small group of countries and institutions.
The European University in the 21st Century. Reconciling the social dimension, excellence, internationalisation and sustainable funding (EUSEIF)
The EUSEIF project was launched in late 2011, with financial support from the Lifelong Learning Programme. This oneyear initiative is focused on analysing the interrelations between five issues of central importance to European higher education today, but which are rarely examined jointly. A core consideration will be the extent to which (if at all) the agendas of these different imperatives—social inclusiveness, excellent institutional performance, internationalisation, mobility, and funding—can be attained in parallel, or if and to what extent they are mutually exclusive. Five high-level concept papers will be produced by a team of experts, and an international conference will be convened in 2012, designed around the project’s main thematic tracks. The conference proceedings will subsequently be published in ACA’s monograph series, the ACA Papers on International Cooperation in Education.
European Parliament Framework Contract
In January 2011, ACA and DAAD jointly submitted a “Detailed Briefing Note” to the European Parliament (EP), under the title The Bologna Process: Stocktaking and Prospects. This work was specifically commissioned by the EP and came as a result of DAAD and ACA having successfully responded in late 2010 to an EP call for tenders for a ‘framework service contract’.
This very short yet dense report, published electronically by the EP, presented a concise overview of the Bologna Process since 1998, as well as an assessment of strengths and weakness in terms of the overall performance of the Bologna countries. Also included in the publication were nine ‘thematic status reports’ on the main achievements and challenges seen across the main Bologna action lines, from mobility to employability, and from the quality assurance to the external dimension.
Annual Reports
You can download our Annual Reports in PDF format below. Annual Report 2011.  Annual Report 2010. Annual Report 2009.Annual Report 2008. Annual Report 2007. Annual Report 2006. Annual Report 2005. Annual Report 2004. Annual Report 2003. Annual Report 2002. Annual Report 2001. Annual Report 2000.

Impact of the global economic crisis on higher education: What are the leadership and management challenges? ACA Newsletter guest article by Dr. Ellen Hazelkorn and Martin Ryan, Higher Education Policy Research Unit, Dublin Institute of Technology.
Higher education is currently experiencing tremendous change. The ongoing global economic crisis is increasing pressure for higher education institutions (HEIs) to demonstrate greater relevance to, and better value for, individuals and society. The continuing shift to the knowledge-based economy and the rising demand for and costs of higher education are occurring at the same time that many governments face financial strain – with a knock-on effect on higher education budgets.
At the same time, HEIs jockey for an improved position at national or international level as global rankings boost competition, placing issues of quality and performance under intense scrutiny. Faculty are also under pressure; calls for greater productivity and accountability challenge traditional work-practices and values. Many of these challenges were manifest decades ago but the confluence of factors associated with the crisis and the subsequent adjustment to the new economic reality has intensified their impact. Some examples of the challenges currently being faced are shown below.
Current leadership and management challenges:
Are HEIs developing a more sustainable business model which is appropriate to the new environment? What kinds of structural and organisational changes are being made to enhance efficiency and improve productivity? To what extent has the crisis affected the role or responsibilities of higher education? How is the new economic reality affecting the quality of educational provision and how is this being monitored and measured? Have changes been made to academic work practices in order to better respond to the new competitive and fiscally restrictive environment? What effect are these changes having on educational quality and institutional reputation?
In 2010, the OECD/IMHE Conference, “Higher Education in a World Changed Utterly: Doing More with Less”, brought together researchers, leaders and policy-makers focused on how the higher education sector could navigate through the crisis. It has now become commonplace to say that HEIs need to “do more with less”, but is the current need to implement change a profound paradigm shift in our model for mass higher education, or simply a temporary necessity? It may be the case that recent developments will expose profound structural deficits in our broadly-accepted model for mass higher education.
There is, however, a lack of deep-level knowledge about what exactly is happening in higher education. To date, much attention has focused on the national policy level with relatively generalised statements describing how individual institutions are coping in different countries. Except for anecdotal accounts, we have a poor understanding about the extent of structural adjustment, the impact on HEI mission, the impact on students and educational quality, on research and engagement, and on the sustainability of individual institutions.
“Managerialism” is a controversial term for sections of the academic literature, variously linked with the loss of university autonomy and the adoption of neo-liberal principles. But, leading an institution in the current climate is very difficult. As a result, university presidents and rectors are adopting a more strategic and professional approach to governance and management. What are the leadership challenges - and what choices are being made - and what can institutions learn from each other? To what extent are the issues common across world-regions and institutional types?
To begin to answer these and many other questions, we are conducting an international study, “The Impact of the Global Economic Crisis on Higher Education: Leadership and Management Challenges” in partnership with the International Association of Universities (IAU). This will be the first comprehensive, in-depth international comparative study on the impact of the global economic crisis on higher education. A number of key themes around sustainability, efficiency, productivity, quality and participation are pertinent to this investigation.
As the first intensive study in this domain, it will draw on the experience of individual institutions using a representative sample of case studies from around the world. Any college or university interested in participating should contact Martin Ryan before August 31st.

Universities in the UK contributed £3.3 billion to the economy in 2010-11 through services to business, including commercialisation of new knowledge, delivery of professional training, consultancy and services.
These comprise part of a much wider economic impact (Note 1).
Analysis by HEFCE of the eleventh annual Higher Education – Business and Community Interaction survey shows that the total value of the services (Note 2) which UK universities provide to the economy and society increased by 7 per cent in 2010-11, from £3.1 billion in 2009-10 to £3.3 billion.
Despite wider economic uncertainty, spending on university services by large business increased by 7 per cent, from £587 million in 2009-10 to £629 million in 2010-11. Universities are stimulating economic growth and contributing to public services and society.
The report, published today, finds encouraging signs of the rising value of UK knowledge exchange (Note 3). This is illustrated by increases in income to universities from facilities and equipment – such as wind tunnels or digital media suites – where income grew by 12 per cent over the previous year, to £129 million in 2010-11.
    * In 2010-11 268 new businesses were set up based on the world-class research carried out by UK universities, bringing the total number of active spin-off companies to 1,262. These companies employed around 18,000 people and turned over nearly £2.1 billion during the year.
    * UK universities formed one new company per £24 million of research funding during 2010-11. This far exceeds the record of US universities (one new company per £56 million).
    * Graduates established over 2,800 new enterprises to capitalise on the knowledge and experience gained while studying. Universities support these enterprises by embedding enterprise in degree courses, and also by providing advice and facilities for graduates to set up and grow their businesses, and by putting them in touch with investors looking for opportunities.
    * The direct application of knowledge to solving problems in the public and private sectors also grew, with collaborative research increasing by 16 per cent and contact research by 7 per cent.
Sir Alan Langlands, HEFCE Chief Executive, said:
    Universities across the UK are working with businesses of all shapes and sizes to help generate innovative, high-value products and services.
    ‘In challenging economic times, the HE sector is doing all it can to drive growth – in everything from the commercialisation of new knowledge, delivery of professional training and research with business, through to income from their equipment and services.’
    ‘The sector is clearly delivering on the Government’s ambition for university knowledge exchange income from external sources to grow by 10 per cent over the next three years (note 5): intellectual property licensing income, for example, has increased in England by 3 per cent to £47.5 million. In one year we have already seen external income grow in England by 5 per cent.’
    ‘Higher education in this country is world leading. It is a great national asset, something we should all be proud of.’
David Willetts Minister for Universities and Science said:
    ‘Universities and industry working together are making a substantial contribution to the UK’s economic growth. The latest analysis shows that external income to the higher education sector from business and other users has continued to increase, despite the challenging economic environment, to over £3.3 billion.
    ‘Today’s increase in the number of new start-up companies by staff and recent graduates of higher education institutions also highlights the important role that universities have in creating a more entrepreneurial society.’
Notes
   1. In terms of its wider economic impact the HE sector generated over £59 billion of output. ‘The impact of universities on the UK economy’ University of Strathclyde report for UUK, 2009’.
   2. The report ‘Higher Education – Business and Community Interaction survey 2010-11’ (HEFCE 2012/18) is available.
   3. Services provided by universities to business include: consultancy, training, use of facilities and equipment, contract and collaborative research as well as Intellectual Property and very highly skilled people. 
   4. Data for the HE-BCI survey were collected by the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA). The survey is analysed and published annually by HEFCE on behalf of the UK Stakeholders Group and the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills. The raw data were published by HESA in May; this publication provides further analysis of the data including a longer time series.

Dossier d'actualité Veille et Analyses: Le défi de l'évaluation des compétences, n°76- juin 2012. Auteur: Olivier Rey. Télécharger la version intégrale du dossier.  
Résumé
L’adoption du socle commun de connaissances et de compétences en 2005 en France a suscité de nombreux débats. Malgré diverses hésitations politiques, l’objectif global du socle a finalement été confirmé depuis et ne semble pas devoir être remis en cause par la nouvelle majorité.
La généralisation des livrets de compétence dans les établissements scolaires porte en revanche des questions concrètes qui font souvent de l’évaluation le vrai point d’entrée des compétences dans les classes.
Si de nombreux travaux ont permis de préciser ce que peuvent être les compétences dans l’éducation, leur évaluation reste en effet problématique.
Pour passer d’une évaluation traditionnelle des savoirs à une prise en compte des compétences, les acteurs du système éducatif semblent privilégier la voie de changements incrémentaux afin de faire l’économie d’une révolution traumatisante et donc probablement inefficace. Au risque de dénaturer les vrais changements dont devrait être porteuse une évaluation des compétences ?
Ce dossier, après un rappel de quelques controverses qui affectent les compétences, s'efforce de dresser les principales caractéristiques d'une évaluation des compétences qui semblent faire l'objet de convergences parmi les chercheurs francophones.
Sont alors mises en lumière les difficultés de concilier les évaluations scolaires traditionnelles et ce que devrait être une évaluation des compétences en contexte éducatif, ce qui pose notamment le problème de la place des notes.
Enfin, le dossier s'attache à voir comment l'évaluation des compétences a été prise en compte en France dans le cadre de la loi de 2005 sur le socle commun et des dispositifs qui y sont liés, comme par exemple l'introduction du livret personnel de compétences.
Pour citer ce dossier :
Olivier Rey (2012). Le défi de l'évaluation des compétences. Dossier d’actualité Veille et Analyses, n°76.

Resource pack
Europe's coming of age: Europeans are now living longer than ever before with significant implications for the sustainability of pensions, economic growth and the future labour supply. The increased lifespan, on average 8-9 years more than in 1960, is great news  - particularly if accompanied by more years in good health - but also poses many questions for individuals, their families and social systems. How long do I need to work? Can I even afford to retire? Does society recognise my contribution in providing care and volunteering?
Conditions at work - what needs to change in the workplace to keep older workers
For most people work is not only a source of income but also an important aspect of their personal identity and their social life. When workers grow older, the positive elements of work often retain their importance, but for many it becomes more difficult to do their jobs. The latest findings from the European Working Conditions Survey (EWCS 2010) provide some good news in this respect: they show that the percentage of workers in the EU27 that think they will be able to do their current job at the age of 60 has risen marginally from 57% in 2000 to 59% in 2010.
Working after retirement - a growing phenomenon
Over the past five years employment rates among workers aged 65 to 74 years increased by 15% in the EU27 (Eurostat, 2011). Most people in this age group are pensioners, demonstrating that it has become more common for pensioners to take on paid employment. There are two reasons why pensioners are increasingly involved in paid work. First, many want to work. This group sees work as a way to contribute to society, to be in contact with others, and to keep active. Improved health among pensioners has contributed to the growth of this group. Second, many pensioners need to work. For them, income after retirement from state pensions, occupational pensions, accumulated savings and other sources is just too low.
Impact of the recession - older workers are less affected
Keeping older employees in the workforce for longer has been at the heart of national and European policies since the late 1990s. These policies have had an impact. Employment rates for older workers aged 55 to 64 have increased considerably over the last ten years, from 38% to 47% (Eurostat, 2000–2010). Recessions tend to hit younger workers especially hard, and this recession has been no exception. However, Eurofound research reveals that employment of older workers in the EU has increased in all types of jobs, and especially in the health, education and social work sectors.
Demographic change - its impact on Europe
Europeans are living longer than ever before, nearly ten years more than in 1960. The increased lifespan is great news but also poses many questions for individuals, their families and social systems. Other demographic developments reinforce the challenges: fewer children are being born, which means fewer people are paying into state pension and healthcare systems, and there is a smaller pool of potential carers. Europe's population growth is still fuelled mainly by immigration. Non-EU citizens have been joining EU countries at a rate of one to two million per year and intra-EU mobility has also increased. By 2060 the proportion of migrants and their descendants will have doubled (Eurostat, 2011).

UNESCO Guidelines on the Recognition, Validation and Accreditation of the Outcomes of Non-formal and Informal Learning launched in New Delhi 29–30 June 2012.
The UNESCO Guidelines on the Recognition, Validation and Accreditation of the Outcomes of Non-formal and Informal Learning were successfully launched at a conference on ”Recognising Prior Learning: A key to Lifelong Learning” held in New Delhi on 29 and 30 June 2012 organised by the National Literacy Mission Authority (NLMA) in partnership with UIL. In the presence of the honourable Dr Daggubati Purandeshwari, Minister for State for Education, Government of India, Dr Arne Carlsen, Director of UIL, elaborated on the contents of the Guidelines and highlighted that to implement the Guidelines, UNESCO will play an active role in the following areas:  1) Developing an RVA observatory for collecting and disseminating best practice at different stages in the development of Recognition, Validation and Accreditation (RVA) systems; 2) Facilitating policy dialogue, networking and sharing of experience between Member States through peer-learning activities and cooperation among key stakeholders in different regions; 3)Facilitating studies on different RVA systems, mechanisms, instruments and tools through collaborative international research in the field of RVA; and 4) Responding to the request of Member States to provide technical assistance and capacity-building to key national stakeholders and practitioners to enable them to construct and implement the RVA systems. In his concluding statement, Mr Jagmohan Singh Raju, Director-General of the NLMA welcomed the cooperation with UIL. NLMA will soon be developing its own Framework for the Recognition of Prior Learning for Adult Literacy.
Find Guidelines under: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002163/216360e.pdf.

Date: 24-26 October, 2012. Location: Nuremberg, Germany. Organiser: ENIL-European Network for Intergenerational Learning.
Who should attend: Educators, practitioners, policy makers, organisations and individuals from across Europe. To find out more and to register visit: www.enilnet.eu.
About this conference
The second ENIL conference will consider the theme of ‘Intergenerational Learning; Towards Active Ageing and Intergenerational Solidarity´. A range of presentations and workshops will explore the contribution of intergenerational approaches and methods to active ageing and intergenerational solidarity. Thematic workshops will look at how policy and practice can support learning, active ageing and intergenerational solidarity in the education, employment and social sector.
For a full programme and to register please visit ‘Conferences´ at www.enilnet.eu
Delegates may be able to apply for funding from their national agency for travel and subsistence costs.
Please note: The deadline for funding applications for some national agencies is 30th April 2012.
About the European Network for Intergenerational Learning
The European Network for Intergenerational Learning (ENIL) aims to foster new ideas and developments in intergenerational learning. Intergenerational Learning is defined as a learning partnership based on reciprocity and mutuality involving people of different ages where the generations work together to gain skills, values and knowledge.
The Network offers practitioners, policy makers, organisations and individuals across Europe a platform for channels for the ongoing exchange of expertise, good practice, news, research and developments in the field. ENIL has been funded with support from the European Commission. The network can be joined at www.enilnet.eu.

3rd International Conference of the LEM Project. Under the theme "Creativity, Lifelong Learning and the Ageing Population" to be held on October 11, 2012 in Östersund, Sweden. Parallel event: first meeting of the new EARLALL (European Association of Regional and Local Authorities on Lifelong Learning) work group on Lifelong Learning and the Ageing Population, coordinated by NCK on behalf of the Jämtland Region.
NCK, The Nordic Centre of Heritage Learning - LEM Partner and coordinator of the Working Group ‘Museums and the Ageing Population’- will host the third LEM international conference in Östersund, Sweden on October 11 2012, with the theme ‘Creativity, Lifelong Learning and the Ageing Population’. The conference is taking place in conjunction with the General Assembly of the European Association of Regional and Local Authorities for Lifelong Learning (EARLALL), a group of 23 regional and local authorities aiming to influence European policy and to co-operate in projects in the field of lifelong learning. The conference will therefore bring together museum professionals, stakeholders, regional politicians and policy makers of the EARLALL group, in order to add a new perspective to the subject of older people and museums addressed by the LEM project and contribute to its sustainability.
NCK participates in EARLALL through the Region of Jämtland. With the support of NCK, the Region of Jämtland will propose to introduce a new work group on the ageing population in EARLALL. A formal proposal will be put forward to the board of EARLALL and a decision will be taken during the general assembly in Östersund in October.
Draft programme of the LEM Conference.
EARLALL work group proposal
Lifelong Learning and the Ageing Population
Background
2012 is the European Year of Active Ageing and Solidarity between Generations. It is well known that the part of the population in Europe who has reached normal retirement age will become a rapidly growing proportion of the total population during the next decades. The challenge to Europe, the member states and to regions is enormous and is getting increasing attention.
The learning and education perspective is central to both well being and social economics when we address the issue of an ageing population. From OECD we know that while the OECD average percentage of tertiary educated in the age group 55-64 is about 20 the same percentage in the group of 25-34 year olds is about 40%. This is a good indicator for illustrating that the demands from the elderly generation will change dramatically in the coming years. At the same time people in general gets older and society needs to find ways to stimulate people to stay in the work force longer and at the same time employers as well as elderly employees needs to be stimulated towards investing time and money in competence development.
The role of regional leadership in these processes is greater than so far realized and the need for a broader holistic thinking about learning is necessary when addressing needs and resources in ageing.
EU perspective
The European Commission adopted on 29 April 2009 a Communication on the impact of an ageing population in the EU. It was accompanied by the 2009 Ageing Report which provides age-related expenditure projections on the basis of the population projections by Eurostat AGE Platform Europe has collected a number of good practice examples of initiatives to promote improved solidarity between generations. It also provides numerous links to information sources and ideas around intergenerational solidarity, including documents from the EY2012 coalition.
The European demographic landscape is far from homogenous and that goes for the issue of ageing population too. Not only do we see major difference between member states such as Germany and Italy in the one end and Poland and The Netherlands in the other end. Comparing regions makes the image even further complex.
Within the European policy structure the issue of ageing population is relevant in several areas such as social cohesion, immigration, regional development, lifelong learning and culture. The challenge of bringing these diverse policy areas together for tackling the challenge and exploit the potential of an ageing population is imminent and the central role as policy broker for lifelong learning thinking in the area is still to be developed.
Regional perspective
The Committee of the Regions (CoR) adopted an opinion on the above-mentioned European Commission’s 2009 Communication on Dealing with the Impact of an Ageing Population in the EU. It provides recommendations, including advocating an area-specific approach to dealing with ageing populations and highlighting the value of trans-regional and interregional schemes.
The CoR has also carried out a study entitled “Active ageing: local and regional solutions”. The final report sets out the main trends in demographic changes and the solutions adopted with respect to five main policy areas: employment; access to social services; mobility and accessibility of transport; adapted housing; and social inclusion. The major differences between member states and between regions within the countries makes it necessary for regions which are already facing the age challenge to come find or develop solutions which are attractive on the political level as well as the professional, social and individual level.
The role played by or the potential for lifelong learning in active ageing has as for many other lifelong learning issues to find its solutions on regional level close to the citizens.