II International Workshop University, Society and State: Universitary reform, Latinamerican universities and reform. From 16-11-11 to 17-11-11. Montevideo, Uruguay. Organized by the Association of Universities Montevideo Group. This Workshop aims to account for different activities such as teaching, research and extension, which promote actions that foster transformation toward new forms of teaching and learning. The final goal of this conference is to generate debate regarding different social issues and the role that public universities, civic society and different state actors can have. This seminar is directed to researchers, students, professors and people interested.
Temas: La universalización de la Educación Superior y Renovación de la Enseñanza, Contribución de las universidades al desarrollo integral de la Región, Cogobierno como modelo de gestión y gobierno universitario.
Cogobierno como modelo de gestión y gobierno universitario
Cogobierno y autonomía son dos principios definitorios de la reforma universitaria latinoamericana. Casi un siglo ha pasado desde los sucesos de la Reforma Córdoba y han sido diversos los caminos que las universidades de la región han recorrido.
Las universidades latinoamericanas no han sido ajenas a los diferentes climas políticos sociales y culturales de los países, en estos, el cogobierno y la autonomía han evolucionado, asumiendo diferentes formas y generando gran diversidad de experiencias. Para que estos principios sigan vigentes como modelo de gestión universitaria, es imprescindible repensarlos creativamente a la luz de los cambios que han ocurrido en la sociedad. Se trata de aprender de lo ocurrido y sugerir su actualización, teniendo en cuenta los desafíos futuros que tienen los países y las Universidades.
La universalización de la Educación Superior y Renovación de la Enseñanza
Multiplicar el acceso efectivo a la enseñanza avanzada es una meta definitoria de la Reforma Universitaria. Así como la defensa de la educación superior como un bien público fue una bandera de las universidades latinoamericanas en las décadas pasadas (Conferencia UNESCO 1998 y 2003), la idea de generalización de la enseñanza es una bandera propositiva para el futuro. Ello exige ampliar cuantitativamente la oferta educativa y mejorarla cualitativamente. Se trata de conocer y discutir sobre de que forma las universidades de la región y los sistemas educativos de los países, piensan y encara en la práctica este asunto.
La renovación de la enseñanza trata de dar cuenta de actividades que desde la enseñanza, la investigación y la extensión, promuevan acciones que propicien transformaciones a partir de nuevos formatos de enseñanza aprendizaje, de manera que más estudiantes puedan avanzar en sus estudios con mejores resultados, atendiendo problemas como la desvinculación, la diversificación de la oferta de grado y postgrado, la flexibilidad de trayectorias curriculares, la coordinación con el conjunto del sistema terciario público, el acceso a sectores de población menos favorecidos, la mejora de la formación docente, y el aggiornamiento de la currícula de estudio a las nuevas realidades.
Contribución de las universidades al desarrollo integral de la Región
Las universidades pueden contribuir de manera diversa, al desarrollo integral de nuestros países. La Universidad pública, debe asumir compromisos y profundizar la contribución del mejoramiento de las condiciones de vida a través del desarrollo socio-económico, ambiental, cultural e integral de las personas. Para ello cuenta con capacidades académicas que propician la interacción con los Estados, las organizaciones sociales, el sector privado y el conjunto de la sociedad de forma de buscar caminos de desarrollo sostenible. Se procurará conocer las mejores experiencias de colaboración de las Universidades con la sociedad en su conjunto, pensando posibles caminos de coordinación para el desarrollo nacional y regional.

Global event with sponsorship of the UNESCO Education Sector's Section for Higher Education, "The 1st Global Convention of UNESCO Chairs in Higher Education", 14 - 15 October 2011, Center for Advanced Academic Studies of the University of Zagreb, Dubrovnik, Croatia. UNESCO Chairs, UNITWIN Networks and Inter-University cooperation.
Organized by the University of Zagreb UNESCO Chair for Governance and Management of Higher Education group (Matko Barišić, Pavel Gregorić, Ksenija Grubišić, Helena Jasna Mencer, Marko Rogošić, Hrvoje Šikić and Ksenija Turković), with generous assistance of Aleksa Bjeliš, Rector of the University of Zagreb and with sponsorship of the UNESCO Education Sector's Section for Higher Education in Paris, France.
UNESCO Education Sector’s Section for Higher Education and the UNESCO Chair in Governance and Management of Higher Education of the University of Zagreb are joint organizers of the 1st Global Convention of UNESCO Chairs in Higher Education. The Convention will take place in the beautiful coastal town of Dubrovnik, from 14 to 15 October 2011.
The participants will arrive on Thursday 13 October. They will be accommodated in two different three-star hotels in Dubrovnik, both close to the Postgraduate Center of the University of Zagreb where the Convention will take place.
The first day of the convention will be devoted to the question of diversification of universities on global, regional and national levels. We have invited prominent speakers for this session, including NN1 and NN2. You are invited to take active part in the panels and discussions.
On the second day of the convention, every UNESCO Chair will give a presentation of no more than 5 minutes, summarizing the past, present and future activities of the Chair. This should provide with a level of acquaintance sufficient for exploring the possibilities of joint projects on different levels in the discussions. There will be six short presentation in each of the four sessions.
After the presentations, discussions and a joint dinner, in two morning sessions of the third day, the Chairs will have an opportunity to present and discuss ideas for future joint projects and activities.

How could the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) contribute to fostering the public and social responsibility of higher education?
I would divide that question into two parts: first the part about public responsibility and then the part about social responsibility. Public responsibility for higher education is one of the foundations of the EHEA. The ministers said, in Berlin in 2001 and in Prague in 2003, that this is one of the foundations. But now, why have they said it twice? Why do they state the obvious? Or because it is feared that one of the characteristics of higher education in Europe is really in danger? I believe that the latter is the case. Therefore, we need to see how this public responsibility can be translated in a relatively complex age.
At the Council of Europe, we have done a project on this topic and identified four variants. We say that the public authorities have sole responsibility for everything having to do with the framework: legislation on grading systems, quality assurance and so on. This responsibility is held by the public authorities alone. However, I also believe that the public authorities have a larger, overriding responsibility to ensure equal access to opportunities in higher education. Then there are other areas in which the public authorities have an important, but not exclusive, responsibility: funding, production, etc.
So there are public universities, there are private universities as well, there is private funding in many countries-but always within a framework established by the public authorities.
Perhaps we could argue a bit about the details, but this, I think, is the key to public responsibility for higher education.
The social responsibility of institutions, I think, has more to do with attitudes, and within attitudes, perhaps systems. It also depends on how we assess publicly owned companies and other institutions that fund higher education and the criteria they apply. We must establish criteria that also value the activities of institutions, subsidies, etc., to increase access and so on. For example, in France today there is a debate over increasing access to the grandes écoles for students from disadvantaged sectors that traditionally have not entered these schools. Institutions also work with local communities. Here in Europe, for example, I think we have much to learn from the United States, where this is much more common. In the definition of objectives, we need to look beyond the purely economic questions that are currently at the centre of the debate in Europe. For me, higher education obviously performs the function of preparing students for the labour market, but it also helps to prepare them for citizenship-for living as citizens in a democratic society-and to develop them as people.
How can the collective consciousness, democratic processes and the citizenry be reinforced by higher education in Europe?
I believe that a hallmark of higher education in Europe is the role played by students. I do not know of anywhere else in the world where students play the same role in the governance of institutions and education systems. So first of all, students should be encouraged to participate fully in institutional life. Here in Europe, we have the European Students’ Union, which plays a very important role. We also have the national unions corresponding to each institution. The problem is that only a minority of students are active in student organisations. We need to encourage students to participate more. Institutional leaders and ministers need to state clearly that the mission of higher education is important, and this importance should also be taken into account when it comes to funding. Without funding, there can be no importance.
What structural changes are needed to foster the relationship between higher education institutions and societies?
The Bologna Process, which is underway now, has focused on structural changes. We have changed the education system into a three-cycle system throughout almost all of Europe. There is now greater emphasis on quality assurance. What is sometimes lacking is a discussion of why: Why are we doing this? I am convinced that these reforms are necessary, but I think there hasn’t been enough discussion of the relationship between structures, structural reforms and the goals of higher education-in other words, preparation for the labour market but also the democratic mission. One example would be when we talk about learning outcomes, which are a key part of the grading framework. This is another tool that can be used to strengthen students’ capacity for citizenship. I think it’s a rather important tool, or instrument, in this regard.
How can we change from a competitive model of higher education to a cooperative one?
First of all, I don’t think we have to choose between a competitive and a cooperative model. Both aspects are present, as they always have been. It is true that rankings are ultimately a competition for funding, the outcome of which usually depends on the public authorities. Yes, there is an element of competition. But at the same time, there are many interuniversity cooperation projects in which knowledge is shared. I think this whole debate over rankings is dangerous. However, if you measure only research results—and research results in certain disciplines, such as the natural sciences, are relatively easy to measure-this can indeed serve as a tool that enhances competition, at least as far as cooperation is concerned. I think it depends very much on how we define quality. We want to guarantee quality, but exactly what sort of quality? I believe that Europe needs institutions that excel in research in all areas, not just natural science and economics but also in the social sciences, the humanities and linguistics. But we also need institutions that excel in teaching and have a teaching-oriented environment. If we create a quality system and we create rankings, then this is also one aspect. We also need institutions that play an important role in the local community. We also need institutions that provide opportunities to people who otherwise might not reach higher education. The problem is that, under the current system, greater value is placed on one activity than on another. I think we need to reach a situation in which excellence is evaluated: excellence in research, excellence in teaching, excellence in community service and so on. I believe that everyone who teaches in higher education should have personal experience in research. Still, I think it is a legitimate alternative for a person to say, “I have this research base, but in my career I do not strive to be a world-class senior researcher. Instead, I want to teach, to stimulate my students’ curiosity, to transmit knowledge. I can’t do this without being up to speed on research, but my main mission is to work with my local community.” All this has to be valued. If we only value research careers, we’re not going to make it.
The problem is that we need to have several goals at once. I don’t mean to say that preparation for the job market isn’t important, or that research isn’t important—both are essential. But other things are important, as well. And we need a broader vision than what we have right now.
Bionote
Sjur Bergan is Head of the Department of Higher Education and History Teaching at the Council of Europe (Directorate of School, Out-of-School and Higher Education Directorate General IV - Education, Culture and Cultural Heritage, Youth and Sport). He joined the Council of Europe in 1991 and has since been involved in most of the Council’s higher education activities, among other functions as secretary to the Steering Committee for Higher Education and Research (CDESR) and Council of Europe representative on the Bologna Follow Up Group and Board. Sjur Bergan was also a member of the Bologna working groups on qualifications frameworks and on the Bologna Process in the global context. He is responsible for the Council’s activities on recognition and mobility, including the establishment of a joint programme with UNESCO in this area and Co-Secretary of the ENIC Network. Before joining the Council of Europe, Sjur Bergan worked in the administration of the University of Oslo from 1983 until 1991. Sjur Bergan is the editor of Recognition Issues in the Bologna Process (2003), with Luc Weber of The Public Responsibility for Higher Education and Research (2005) and, with Nuria Sanz, of The Heritage of European Universities (2002).
*This is not an exact transcript of the interview done with Sjur Bergan, but rather a version that complements such an interview.

New Survey Examines Global Academic Collaboration. IIE-FUB Research Report Provides Data on International Joint and Double Degree Programs in the Global Context.
NEW YORK and BERLIN, September 12, 2011—A new study finds that universities around the world are collaborating across borders to better prepare their students to work with colleagues and customers in other countries. The new report, Joint and Double Degree Programs in the Global Context, released today by the Institute of International Education (IIE) and the Freie Universität Berlin finds that a growing number of universities around the world are developing joint and double degree programs, and that nearly two thirds of the institutions responding reported that they launched these new degree programs in the past decade. The study finds that a development that largely started in Europe in the 1990s has now become an increasingly important global trend, with 95% of the nearly 250 respondents in 28 countries saying they want to develop more joint and double degree programs.
The study, based on a survey conducted in Spring 2011, assesses the current landscape of joint and double degree programs and identifies the challenges, opportunities, motivations and impact of developing such programs. The report presents findings from a global perspective, as well as country-specific trends for the six countries with the highest number of institutions responding to the survey: Australia, France, Germany, Italy, the UK and the U.S.
“While joint and double degree programs can be complex to implement, they represent the emergence of a new and deeper partnership model, in which universities develop a better understanding of  each other’s curriculum and institutional expertise,” according to Daniel Obst, who co-authored the report and leads IIE’s Center for International Partnerships in Higher Education. “Although many institutions worldwide are developing these joint and double degree programs at the Master’s level, in the United States we are seeing more institutions offering collaborative degrees at the undergraduate level, often as part of their efforts to attract international students,” Mr. Obst said.
With more than 3 million students enrolled in higher education outside of their own countries each year, enhancing student mobility has become a top priority for countries around the world, stimulating a global conversation about best practices, trends and future plans. Traditional study abroad programs or direct enrollment in foreign institutions remain by far the predominant option for students wishing to have an international experience. However, the growth in joint and double degree programs indicate that higher education institutions are increasingly seeking ways to firmly embed these international experiences in their curricula and deepen the academic experience for students and faculty at home and abroad. The highly structured degree programs, while complex to launch, often mitigate potential challenges related to study abroad, such as credit transfer problems or the possibility of prolonged time to graduation.
“Higher education institutions interested in collaborative degree partnerships are well-advised to develop a comprehensive strategy for establishing joint and double degree programs that addresses often cited problems with program sustainability, student recruitment and funding,” stressed co-author Matthias Kuder of Freie Universität Berlin. “The claim that such programs are part and parcel of an institution’s internationalization efforts is quickly made but, in fact, many institutions lack clear rules and procedures for program development and have no specific marketing or recruitment measures in place,” said Mr. Kuder.
This study builds on a 2009 policy study by IIE and the Freie Universität Berlin, funded by the EU-U.S. Atlantis Program of the U.S. Department of Education’s Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE) and the European Commission. While the earlier survey focused exclusively on transatlantic joint and double degree programs, the new study expands the scope of the research and aims to assess the global landscape of collaborative degree programs.  The 2009 project resulted in a survey report, Joint and Double Degree Programs in the Transatlantic Context, and a book, Joint and Double Degree Programs: An Emerging Model for Transatlantic Exchange, which features practical recommendations for developing and delivering collaborative degree programs between U.S. and European universities.
Major findings of Joint and Double Degree Programs in the Global Context report include:
- Double degrees are much more common than joint degrees. 84% of the respondents offer double degrees, while 33% offer joint degrees, under which students get one degree certificate signed by all participating institutions.
- Among all joint or double degree programs reported, the majority were at the master’s level; however, the majority of programs reported by Australian institutions are at the doctoral level, and the majority of programs reported by U.S. institutions are at the undergraduate level.
- The five countries most frequently cited as the home country for current partner institutions are: France, China, Germany, Spain, and the United States.  However, India was in the top five countries noted as being of interest for future collaborative degree programs.
- The most popular academic discipline among the collaborative degree programs noted in this study is Business and Management, followed by Engineering.
- Joint and double degree programs tend to be a relatively new mode of academic collaboration. The majority of responding institutions indicated that they set up their first joint or double degree programs between 2001 and 2009. While institutions in Europe generally launched their first programs earlier (1991-2000), institutions in Australia, the UK and the U.S. were most likely to have developed their programs more recently.
- Nearly all survey participants report that joint and double degree programs are part of their institution’s internationalization strategy. However, only about half have a clear institutional policy on program development and less than half have developed particular methods for the marketing of these programs.
- A large majority (95%) of responding institutions plan to continue to develop more joint and double degree programs.
- The top motivations for developing joint or double degree programs are to broaden educational offerings, strengthen research collaboration, advance internationalization, and raise international visibility/prestige. Increasing revenue was major motivating factor only for respondents from the U.S. and the UK.
- The top challenges for developing joint or double degree programs are securing adequate funding and ensuring sustainability. Language issues tend to not be a challenge for most institutions, with the exception of U.S. respondents.
- According to survey respondents, the potential for double-counting of credits appears to be one of the least important challenges. Furthermore, 66 percent of the responding institutions indicated that they have measures in place to regulate the double counting of credits.

II International Conference “International Cooperation: Integration of Educational Areas”, 17—19 November 2011, Hosted by Udmurt State University (Russia).
Udmurt State University is pleased to publish a Second Call for Papers for the II International Conference “International Cooperation: Integration of Educational Areas” to be held on 17—19 November 2011, in honor of its 80th anniversary.
The conference aims to increase effectiveness of international cooperation in the sciences and education, and to summarize the experiences of teachers and students in institutions of higher education within academic mobility programs during the transition to a multi-tier education system.
The Organising and Program Committees welcome contributions on the following topics:
    Russian and international experiences with multi-tiered systems of higher education;
    Innovative technologies as a factor of the improvement of quality education;
    Cross-cultural communication in modern information and academic areas;
    Challenges of training international students;
    Language education as a means of developing cross-cultural contacts;
    Practical aspects of academic mobility for students and instructors;
    Integration of research and education: the institutionalization of innovative ideas and projects at a university.
The event should be of interest to institutional leaders, university researchers, professors, student unions and representatives of other bodies involved in educational policy. In-person and virtual participations in the conference are possible.
The conference languages are Russian and English. To register, please, download the registration form below, fill it in and send it to the Organizing Committee at interpro@udsu.ru. Registration deadline is prolonged until July 11, 2011.
The registration will be confirmed by an email. Please wait for your confirmation before making any further arrangements. However, please note that your registration will be completed and considered final only when your payment has been received by the host university.

About the Project
Every year, ESN launches a survey that explores the current issues connected to academic and non-academic mobility. This is one of the biggest and most successful projects of ESN - in the last years more than 40.000 students responded to our online surveys. Many associations - student, teacher, academic, European, as well as various institutions collaborated with us in the project.
Through the gathered opinions of students, ESN gets a better insight in to the issues and is able to represent the students' real needs. ESN passes the results to the main stakeholders in higher education and mobility programmes: European Commission, National Agencies of Erasmus Programme, higher education institutions and all associations concerned with the topic. We believe that our work fosters mobility and improves the quality of exchange for young people in Europe and beyond.
ESNSurvey 2011
Aim of the ESNSurvey 2011
ESNSurvey 2011 "Exchange, Employment and Added Value". The financial crisis and the resulting troubles for the Euro have put European labour market mobility more than ever in the focus of attention. A high degree of flexibility and mobility is the best remedy to overcome the structural differences making the functioning and governing of the Eurozone as challenging as it is today. One of the most promising approaches to promote labour mobility is to increase student mobility.
The mobile students of today will be the mobile labour market participants of tomorrow, or so the idea goes. We want to provide further evidence and insight into that line of arguing with our 2011 edition of the ESN Survey. In addition, we have shorter parts exploring the impact of student mobility on the environment, satisfaction with student organisations and their impact on volunteering.
For ESN sections
Participate with your ESN section in the ESNSurvey project and help us reach as many students as possible by forwarding our e-mail about the ESNSurvey (available upon request at secretariat@esn.org) to your ESN members, exchange students and regular students at your university. With your help, we will make a real difference and contribute to the improvement of student mobility. Answering the survey takes less than 15 minutes, and you have the opportunity to win 1 out of 3 iPods.
After closure of the ESNSurvey, we can provide - upon request - your section with the survey results coming exclusively from the exchange students of your city or country. The results could be presented to your university. You can also request a free printed booklet with the complete survey results for your section.
For universities
If you want to join this ESN project, the only thing to do is to forward our e-mail (available upon request at secretariat@esn.org) to your present exchange students and, if possible, to publish information about the ESNSurvey on your university website.
All the students who fully complete the questionnaire and answer two additional questions will have a chance to win a special ESNSurvey prize.
After closure of the ESNSurvey (end of September), we can provide each university – upon request – the survey results coming exclusively from their students. In this way, the ESNSurvey can offer a different point of view on the work of the university towards their students. Positive results can eventually be used as a good promotion of the university.
For National Agencies and educational associations
If your organisation or National Agency wants to become a supporter of the ESNSurvey project, we would kindly ask you to:
    express your willingness to participate in the project at secretariat@esn.org
    forward the email about ESNSurvey 2011 to your members and to all students you are in contact with
    publish the information about the ESNSurvey project on your website and in your newsletter if you have one
To thank you for the support, we will publish your logo on the ESN website in the section of ESNSurvey Partners as well as mention your organisation in the printed booklet with the report on the ESNSurvey results. Additionally, you will receive a free copy of the printed booklet.

Bologna Seminar - New Perspectives for Master Study Programmes in Europe, Berlin, Germany (25-26 October 2011). The German Rectors’ Conference (HRK) and its project nexus are jointly organising the Bologna Seminar “New Perspectives for Master Study Programmes in Europe. Implementing the Second Cycle of Bologna – A European Success story?" which will take place from 25-26 October 2011 in Berlin, Germany.
In preparation for the ministerial conference in Bucharest in 2012, the Bologna Seminar seeks to focus on the current state of Master programmes in the European Higher Education Area. New developments for orientation and transparency on the rapidly increasing “Master-market” such as the marketing of Master degree programmes, recruitment of students, and implementation of lifelong learning will be discussed.
EUA Board Member and President of HRK, Dr Margret Wintermantel and EUA’s Senior Adviser, Howard Davies, will be speaking at the event. EUA’s Head of Unit, Michael Gaebel will also chair a workshop on “How to match Students and Programmes”. As part of the seminar, there is a call for posters which should relate to one of the three criteria: structure, target groups or recruitment strategies and discuss individual perspectives such as the challenges and opportunities faced and solutions to them. For more information, see the HRK website. See also Awarding Credit for Coursework, Recognising University Degrees.

September 2, 2011: Official launch of nine eParticipation University portals – 2nd project Press Release
The 2nd press release of MyUniversity project was circulated today to all European media, stakeholders and interested parties. The press release announces the official launch of nine eParticipation University portals and presents the relevant urls in the English language. Read the 2nd MyUniversity Press Release in English.
Nine eParticipation portals for universities are launched today in order to offer to university members and to local, national and EU stakeholders in the higher education system an opportunity to collaborate within the decision – making processes that address several of the Bologna action lines. The nine end-user universities and the website address of their eParticipation portals are:
International Business School Bulgaria: www.e-myUniversity.eu/ibsedu
University of National and World Economy (Bulgaria): www.e-myUniversity.eu/unwe
University of Vilnius (Lithuania): www.e-myUniversity.eu/vu
University of Presov in Presov (Slovakia): www.e-myUniversity.eu/unipo
Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava (Slovakia): www.e-myUniversity.eu/stuba
Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra (Slovakia): www.e-myUniversity.eu/uniag
Rey Juan Carlos University (Spain): www.e-myUniversity.eu/urjc
University of León (Spain): www.e-myuniversity.eu/ule
Stockholm University (Sweden): www.e-myUniversity.eu/su.
The portals are based on the same software solution developed within the MyUniversity project and will run in pilot phase for a period of 20 months. The participating universities will be able to:
Easily publish European consultations on the Bologna Process on their e-Participation portal and then allow university personnel and students to provide feedback on them; Disseminate key information on the Bologna process; Create online surveys and discussions that can enhance the existing traditional “on-site” meetings organized by them for their own decision-making processes; Track issues raised on the other university e-Participation portals, which could have similarities to the ones they are experiencing, thus allowing them to further cooperate and even create a common policy on how to tackle these issues; Gather their students’ views on the key issues affecting them; Provide their personnel and students with online collaboration tools that help them to interact with their colleagues in order to collect data for both university and EU level reports.
These portals give the opportunity to the university work groups to interact with the higher education stakeholders and provide input to the national and European associations where they belong. Moreover, the university members who are active in the Bologna decision-making process can use the e-Participation tools to interact with other university members and easily extract conclusions that will be used as direct input to their work. In addition, higher education decision makers of all levels (university, national, European), could launch on these portals several e-Participation processes related to different decision making activities and thus clearly communicate the value of such participation in their final decision.
Launched on October 1st, 2010, MyUniversity is a two and a half year project that will demonstrate how the universities could use an array of specific e-Participation tools for involving university members and stakeholders in transparent higher education decision-making processes at local, national and EU level. MyUniversity is currently supported by the European Commission (ICT Policy Support Programme) and involves 13 partners from 7 EU Member States: Belgium, Bulgaria, Greece, Lithuania, Slovakia, Spain and Sweden. For more information, please visit the project website at www.myuniversity-project.eu.
The European Union, staying loyal to the Bologna declaration and the resulting Bologna Process, has been moving towards a unified European Higher Education Area. Today, the Bologna declaration objectives are still valid and more important than ever. The ones that have not yet been achieved require further commitment. One of the key aspects towards the success of the Bologna Process is the close cooperation and interaction between governments, higher education institutions, students, staff, employers and quality assurance agencies. MyUniversity project will equip universities from Bulgaria, Lithuania, Spain, Slovakia and Sweden with a cutting edge e-Participation platform so they can actively participate in the higher education decision making process with valuable input towards future policies and legislation, both locally and at European level.

17-18 October 2011, Carlos Santamaria Center, Campus Guipuzcoa, University of Basque Country, San Sebastian. Education at a Glance 2011: OECD Indicators.
Bernard Hugonnier, Deputy-Director for Education (OECD), Iñaki Goirizelaia, Rector of the University of the Basque Country and Márius Rubiralta, General Secretary for Universities (Ministry of Education) are pleased to present the OECD / IMHE Seminar "Collaboration between Vocational and University Education" which will be held at Campus de Gipuzkoa (Carlos Santamaría Centre), 17-18 October.
Tertiary education has become more diverse in its providers, its learners and the range of skills and training it provides as a response to the growing demand of education in knowledge-based economies. New and more flexible modes of study and delivery have been put in place to attend to the needs of a more heterogeneous student body, in terms of socio-economic background, ethnicity, previous education, age, aspirations, and academic ability. This institutional differentiation has blurred the boundaries between vocational and university education, increasing the competition between tertiary education institutions (TEIs) for students and resources.
In a context of constant changes and great uncertainty, tertiary education institutions (TEIs) have to collaborate in order to improve their  responsiveness to the needs of the labour market and the wider society. TEIs can play a key role in human capital development and innovation systems and can help their cities and regions become more innovative and globally competitive. The OECD Reviews of Higher Education in Regional and City Development assist TEIs  and regional governments to achieve this objective.
This seminar will examine the main challenges and opportunities of collaboration between vocational tertiary and university education for regional development. International good practices of collaboration and division of labour between tertiary education institutions will be presented and discussed from the perspective of their contributions to human capital development and innovation in cities and regions. The seminar is co-organised with the OECD/IMHE, the Spanish Ministry of Education and the University of the Basque Country.
Keynote Speech: Collaboration for what?
The institutional divisions between vocational and university education are unlikely to disappear, but there is international evidence of increased blurring of the boundaries. Tertiary education does not require more barriers; it needs the collaboration between the vocational and the university sectors for social and economic development. What type of collaboration between the two sectors will be more productive for regional development? What are the main challengesto this collaboration? Chair: Miguel SOLER, General Director of Vocational Education, ES, Keynote speaker: Michael YOUNG, Institute of Education of London, UK.
Plenary session I: Widening access to tertiary education.
Mass tertiary education systems must be more differentiated than elite ones because they enroll a more heterogeneous student body, respond to new demands from the labor market, and attempt to cover a wider range of knowledge. Diversification occurs between tertiary education institutions (i.e. universities of applied sciences) and within them (i.e. dual sector universities). Can diversification widen access to those who were traditionally excluded from tertiary education? What are the strengths and weaknesses of the new tertiary education programmes? Are new divides emerging among tertiary education institutions?
Plenary session II: Pathways across the educational system.
Governments have established distinct educational sectors with different aims and purposes, while at the same time they have built bridges across these sectors, in particular to enhance possibilities for student transfer from one to the other. Despite the existence of some formal connections between and within the educational sectors, the level of students’ mobility and recognition of prior learning is still low. What are the best strategies to enhance learning pathways across tertiary education systems? Are the good practices of collaboration in this field scalable to the regional or national level?
Keynote speech: Tertiary education for lifelong learning.
Trends in the global economy mean there is pressure for more flexibility in the provision of education and training and for a more prominent role of lifelong learning in tertiary education institutions. However, the principle of lifelong learning does not fit well with a system based on barriers and divisions even when they are pragmatic and blurred. How well prepared are our tertiary education institutions for providing continuing education? What are the necessary institutional changes they need to face in order to adapt to the new scenario?
Plenary session III: Industry driven skills development.
Tertiary education institutions, if they collaborate with each other and with the industrial sector, can make a significant contribution to human capital development in their cities and regions. The vocational and the university sectors can collaborate through updating and upgrading workers’ skills in firms, sharing business links for apprenticeships and internships, establishing dual programmes with the business sector, etc. Is the business sector asking for more collaboration between vocational and university education? What are the most productive areas of collaboration of these two sectors for human capital development?
Plenary session IV: Vocational and university partnerships to boost innovation.
The regional dimension of innovation is crucial to promote economic growth and competitiveness. All tertiary education institutions can  help improve the capacity of their cities and regions to adapt knowledge and to foster innovation. Collaboration among tertiary education institutions can result in a better contribution of the educational sector to regional innovation system. What kind of economic sectors would benefit the most from the collaboration between vocational and university institutions? What are the gains in terms of economic efficiency of this collaboration?
Roundtable: Making the reform happen: the case of the Campus of International Excellence in Spain.

Tracking students and graduates is extremely important for universities who wish to provide a high quality education to an increasingly diverse student population. Procedures for assessing progress and success of students during their study, towards employment or further qualification, help to understand the impact of study programmes, their relevance for the labour market, and thus generate the necessary information for systematic improvement of courses and support services.
In order to find out more about the drivers, mechanisms and impact of tracking, EUA, in a consortium with the Hochschul-Informations-System GmbH (HIS), Lund University, the University of the Peloponnese, the Danish School of Education/Aarhus University and the Irish Universities Association, launched a project under the Lifelong Learning Programme - Transversal Programme, Key Activity 1, Studies and Comparative Research. The project will last 24 months, from October 2010 to September 2012.
Project Objectives
The TRACKIT! project will undertake a study on the drivers, mechanisms and impact of tracking procedures applied by universities, national agencies and researchers, and assess their relevance for and impact on universities and their members. In the context of the project, “tracking” has been defined as all systematic approaches that can be used to monitor progression paths of HE students and their transition into the labour market or another HE programme.
Expected results
The study is expected to give further indications on how to enhance the institutional capacity for providing high quality student-centred learning and training to a larger and diversified studentship, and to improve the understanding of the articulation between degrees and employability. By doing so, it would be expected to underpin ongoing educational reforms and to deliver an important contribution to the realisation of a Europe of knowledge.
Methodology, project phases
The first phase of the project, from October 2010 to September 2011, consists of the development of a background research report on tracking approaches in use at universities and at national level in different parts of Europe.
The second phase of the project, from September 2011 to March 2012 consists of qualitative research, based on site visits. In total, 10 countries will be covered by 20 site visits.
The third phase will bring the outcomes of the previous phases together in a final report.  The report will contain an analysis of tracking measures and as well as a first impact assessment with regards to institutional enhancement. It will be presented to a larger audience at a dissemination event in September 2012 and will be widely distributed.