By Marielk. Provided that either July or August are the main vacation months at least in most European countries – this is perhaps the time when many have time left over. After finishing all the pocket books one has taken along to vacation and social media has exhausted its entertainment value – perhaps time to tempt with something more educational?
Openculture is a site that is compiling lists of various available free courses online – sorted by discipline, providing a good starting point for further searches for interesting courses, covering a variety of disciplines and topics – from mathematics to biology, from sociology to history.
Are you interested in listening to the course from Yale on modern social theory? Or see if any of the other Yale courses are of interest. Or perhaps view a series of video lectures with Ian Shapiro on the moral foundations of politics (highly recommended!). And on Youtube, you can find various courses offered by University of Berkley.
In general, those of you who use iTunes – do not forget to check out iTunes university - it is full of wonderful lectures on topics that are either highly relevant to research on higher education, or topics that are just fun to listen to. If you planning a car vacation – what better than listen to a few fun lectures by high quality scholars?
And if you get in a mood of looking up into the skies – why not accompany this with a lecture or two on the frontiers and controversies in astronomy?
Information is out there – just take your time to look for it. What would be your best tip for free online courses that are publicly available?

By Inez Meurs. You have worked in internationalisation at a European university for several years and lately, you have noticed that a number of your partner universities are running summer schools or are in the process of setting them up. Where does this ‘summer school buzz’ come from? Is it worthwhile exploring the options for your university?
If you talk to anyone engaged in the organisation of a summer school, most will enthusiastically claim that a summer school is not only very beneficial for their universities and departments, but that there is actually a lot of fun to be had running it! So you decide to give it a go, but you understandably need some guidance…
First steps: gaining approval
Unfortunately, you will probably not be in a position where you can just go ahead and create something new. You will need to have someone’s approval to spend some time (money) on developing the summer school, and that involves convincing a superior of the benefits of a programme that does not exist, without knowing exactly where it will lead. Tricky…. but actually much easier than you think if you approach it in a logical, but perhaps slightly unusual way: consider the summer school as a solution to a problem, an answer to a question, an opportunity that cannot be missed.
Pinpoint your exact need
Could your university do with an additional flow of international students? Do your academic staff need some experience in dealing with an international audience? Is it difficult for your university to find new partners in certain parts of the world? Are the university’s housing facilities or classrooms empty for a few months in the summer? Does your university need extra funding? For each and all of these challenges, (and more), running a summer school can be the easiest and quickest solution. Just keep in mind with which question you start out, and what would be most fitting for your university’s profile and strategy – not just on internationalisation but in general.
Do I need to write a policy paper first?
Please don’t take the usual approach and sit down behind your desk to write a brilliant policy paper. Go out and talk to people! Talk to the people you will need for creating a summer school programme, both academic and non-academic staff, and find out what they are looking for. In doing so, you will not only be sure to deliver something that is really feasible and appropriate. You will also create the goodwill and commitment from those who actually need to do the work.
Capitalise on your own skills
Bear in mind that you have something of high value on offer: you have international contacts, experience in what is needed for international students, and excellent organisational skills. All the barriers people might see in setting up a new international programme, you have them covered.
Who to approach for support?
Suppose you work at a university that is strong in the Social Sciences. You have excellent professors in this field, interesting academic programmes, and good facilities on or around campus. One of the things, however, that could be improved, is the number of international students in the department. The first thing you do is decide with whom in the Social Sciences department you have a good relationship. Is that the Dean? Excellent, start right there. Is it an individual professor? Even better! They are the experts with whom you can discuss ideas for tempting summer school topics. Together, you can decide whether a general course on European Cultures and Identities would be a good introduction for future Master’s students, or if a more specific course on Social Geography could be used to put in the university’s ‘shop window’ during the summer to promote the expertise present in that field.
What’s in it for them?
The academic staff can simply focus on the contents; they can select a field to which they feel the strongest commitment, creating a wonderful course and giving it their best teaching effort. And you can do all the rest for them (since that is where your expertise lies!): recruit students, deal with the application procedures, arrange housing for the students and develop a social programme. It’s very rare these days that academic staff are able to only focus on the academic content of a course without the need for back-to-back meetings and a heavy administrative burden with lots of paperwork. Only with the summer school can they rely on somebody else to take care of all the organisational aspects leaving them to do what they enjoy most!
Is it really that easy?
Since you have experience in the field of internationalisation, you know things are usually not as easy as they seem. But you also know a lot can be done that did not seem feasible initially. Don’t underestimate the value of your experience and expertise. You know what needs to be done to attract international students and to cater for them, academically and socially. You know the risks and ways to manage those risks. And especially, don’t underestimate the need for your entrepreneurial skills. Running a summer school is like running your own shop within a big shopping mall (the university). You need to be creative and business savvy. And if you are setting up a summer school for the first time, please take note of the fact that your university will need some support in realising (mentally and practically) that the summer is no longer a time where business is slow. Who can better provide that support than you? Do you have any tips or success stories which you would like to share regarding summer schools? Please post your comments below! If you’re curious for more details on how to organise a summer school, in September the EAIE will publish a detailed manual containing everything you need to know about setting up and running a successful summer school. The publication, International summer schools forms the final instalment in the EAIE Professional Development Series and can be ordered from the EAIE website as of September. If you are an EAIE member, you will receive your copy at the EAIE Conference (or in the post if you are not attending).
Inez Meurs is an EAIE trainer, Director of the Business Community for the Utrecht Business School, the Netherlands and National Programme Manager for the OECD project on Assessment of Higher Education Learning Outcomes.

Tal y como se quedó en las conclusiones del Encuentro de RUEPEP, que tuvo lugar en la Universidad de Almería los días 15 y 16 de marzo, os informamos de la evolución y de la situación actual del trabajo realizado por la “Subcomisión de Formación Permanente de la CASUE”, y por la Junta Directiva de RUEPEP respecto a los títulos propios.
Como bien sabéis, el “Acuerdo del Consejo de Universidades del día 6 de julio de 2010, refrendado por la Conferencia General de Política Universitaria en su sesión del día 7 de julio de 2010: Las Universidades y la Formación Permanente en España” preveía que, para lograr los objetivos propuestos, el establecimiento, en el seno de la CASUE, de una “Subcomisión de Títulos Propios de Postgrado y Formación Permanente”.
Esta Subcomisión, presidida por el Dr. Juan José Moreso, Rector de la Universidad Pompeu Fabra (UPF) y presidente de CASUE, se constituyó el 22 de febrero de 2011 y concluyó su primera parte del trabajo el día 19 de setiembre de 2011, entregando al Ministerio de Educación el documento final de conclusiones.
Las propuestas de esta Subcomisión, prácticamente en su totalidad, se incorporaron en el “Artículo 24, Títulos Propios” del “Proyecto de Real Decreto por el que se establecen los requisitos básicos para la creación, reconocimiento y funcionamiento de universidades y centros universitarios y se determina su estructura mínima”
En su intervención en la conferencia inaugural del Encuentro de Almería, el Dr. Federico Morán, Director General de Política Universitaria manifestó el interés del Ministerio en continuar el trabajo que teníamos en marcha. En este sentido, el presidente de CASUE contactó con la Dra. Lola Ferre, Vicerrectora de Grado y Postgrado de la Universidad de Granada y vicepresidenta de la Subcomisión,  para ya planificar una reunión en el Ministerio.
La reunión tuvo lugar el día 26 de marzo, y, básicamente, se concluyó que era mucho mejor “separar” el Art. 24 del “Proyecto de Real Decreto” y volver a la idea original de “Orden Ministerial”
Se quedó que la misma Subcomisión presentaría un borrador para su debate.
La Dra. Lola Ferre presentó el “Borrador de Orden Ministerial” en  la Comisión Ejecutiva de CASUE, y en el Plenario de la misma del día 17 de mayo.
El documento fue aprobado en este plenario y el mismo presidente de CASUE lo envió posteriormente tanto al Director General de Política Universitaria como a todos los vicerrectorados miembros de CASUE.
El documento está ya circulando en las universidades y, como nos llegan preguntas a RUEPEP, hemos considerado conveniente informaros del tema.
La Subcomisión de CASUE sigue dispuesta a seguir trabajando con el Ministerio hasta cerrar el documento y que se apruebe y publique. Con lo cual, cualquier aportación, duda, sugerencia que nos hagáis llegar nos puede ayudar en este trabajo.
Os seguiremos informando de cualquier novedad al respecto. Podéis obtener un documento resumen adjunto a esta noticia.
IDEAS FUNDAMENTALES.
Resumen del borrador sobre títulos propios
OBJETO:
La presente Orden tiene por objeto desarrollar el procedimiento de registro de títulos propios de posgrado de Máster Propio y Diploma de Especialización, de acuerdo con las líneas generales establecidas en el Acuerdo del Consejo de Universidades de 6 de julio de 2010, con las directrices emanadas del Espacio Europeo de Educación Superior y con el Artículo 17 del Real Decreto 1509/2008, estableciendo las características, condiciones y el procedimiento de validación de los planes de estudios conducentes a la obtención de estos títulos deben seguir para su inclusión en el Registro de Universidades, Centros y Títulos (RUCT), registro que se aconseja en dicho acuerdo
DESCRIPCIÓN DE TÍTULOS
Se consideran títulos propios objeto de inscripción en el RUCT a efectos de reconocimiento académico, aquellos de duración igual o superior a 30 créditos impartidos por las universidades españolas y que sean promovidos por las mismas para su inscripción explícita tras haber superado el proceso de validación. De ellos son susceptibles de inscripción en el RUCT aquellos que hayan superado 3 ediciones. Excepcionalmente podrán optar a su inscripción en el RUCT aquellos títulos que no habiendo cumplido 3 ediciones las Universidades consideren de valor estratégico y sean sometidos a una evaluación externa a tal efecto.
Título de Master Propio
Duración igual o superior a 60 créditos, cursados durante, al menos, el equivalente a un curso académico, requieren de una titulación universitaria previa, son expedidos por el Rector y cuentan con un Registro centralizado de este tipo de títulos en la Universidad. Han de tener planes de estudios claramente definidos, una valoración de las enseñanzas en sistema ECTS e incluir un Trabajo Fin de Máster con un mínimo de 6 créditos y un máximo del 25% de los créditos consignados en el plan de estudios, para obtener dicha titulación.
Diploma de Especialización
Duración igual o superior a 30 créditos. Han de cumplir las mismas características que los másteres, siendo recomendable, pero no obligatorio, el Trabajo Fin de Diploma de Especialización para obtener la titulación.
PROCESOS DE VALIDACIÓN Y GARANTÍA DE LA CALIDAD
Los títulos propios que las Universidades presenten para su inscripción en el RUCT habrán de estar validados a tal efecto según el protocolo que establezca cada universidad y que cumpla con los requisitos del título que en esta orden se expresan y pasen por una evaluación externa. Las Universidades deberán disponer de un protocolo de aprobación y seguimiento de cada uno de sus títulos propios, que sea transparente y garantice la calidad de las propuestas y que constituirá la validación del título. Las Universidades dispondrán de un Sistema Interno de Garantía de Calidad homologado por las agencias de calidad reconocidas a tal efecto. En este contexto la evaluación de los títulos propios corresponde a las Universidades quedando en manos de las agencias la homologación de sistemas de calidad y el seguimiento de los títulos para su renovación de inscripción en el RUCT.
TRAMITACIÓN DE LA INSCRIPCIÓN EN EL RUCT
El proceso de inscripción en el RUCT de los títulos propios de Máster Propio y de Diploma de Especialización es voluntario para las Universidades, que en el ejercicio de su autonomía podrán decidir qué títulos remite para su inscripción. La universidad responsable del título realizará la petición y garantizará que se cumplan las condiciones de inscripción. En caso de título conjunto la petición se realizará una sola vez por la universidad coordinadora del mismo. El Sistema Interno de Garantía de Calidad deberá ser homologado por cualquier agencia de calidad española incluida en el Registro Europeo de Garantía de Calidad para la Educación Superior (EQAR) y que sea miembro de pleno derecho de la Asociación Europea para el Aseguramiento de la Calidad en la Educación Superior (ENQA). La aplicación de este protocolo será requisito indispensable para la inscripción en el RUCT de un título de Máster Propio Diploma de Especialización.
Niveles de reconocimiento
1. Sin perjuicio de otros niveles de reconocimiento de los títulos que se hayan aprobado siguiendo los protocolos del sistema de garantía de calidad de cada universidad pero no hayan sido inscritos en el RUCT, los que sí aparezcan en dicho registro serán susceptibles de reconocimiento de créditos, de forma total o parcial, de manera automática entre universidades y en títulos de enseñanzas regladas (grado y máster).
2. Reconocimiento por parte de las Administraciones Públicas. Los estudios de Máster Propio y Diploma de Especialización inscritos en el RUCT, al tener por este hecho consideración semejante a las titulaciones oficiales de posgrado, serán valorados dentro de los concursos o concursos-oposiciones que puedan convocar las Administraciones Públicas de acuerdo con los baremos establecidos para títulos oficiales de posgrado.
3. Igualmente, la inscripción en el RUCT, según los procedimientos establecidos en la presente Orden tendría el necesario reconocimiento internacional. La Administración General del Estado establecerá la certificación correspondiente para que este reconocimiento sea real a todos los efectos.

Pourquoi les gens migrent-ils? C’est principalement pour trouver un emploi ou parce qu’ils espèrent une vie meilleure, pour eux-mêmes et pour leurs enfants. Alors, que se passe-t-il quand il n’y a pas d’emplois, et les enfants d’immigrés s’en tirent-ils mieux que leurs parents?
Quand la période est prospère, la migration est sans conteste un outil extraordinaire pour dynamiser l’économie du pays d’accueil, remédier aux pénuries de main-d’œuvre et attirer de nouvelles compétences. Mais que se passe-t-il en période de crise financière et économique et après la crise, pas simplement pour les migrants potentiels mais aussi pour les personnes qui se sont déjà expatriées et pour leurs enfants?
Une chose que la crise a montrée, c’est qu’une grande partie des migrations est motivée par l’espoir de trouver un emploi. S’il n’y a pas d’offre de travail et donc pas de garantie d’une vie meilleure, les gens choisissent de rester chez eux. Ainsi, la migration vers les pays de l’OCDE a diminué pour la troisième année consécutive en 2010, même si, selon certains signes, elle a recommencé à augmenter en 2011, traduisant peut-être les prémices d’une reprise de l’économie.
Mais qu’en est-il des personnes qui se sont déjà expatriées et de leur famille? Dans la population active, les jeunes immigrés ont été particulièrement durement touchés par la crise, surtout en Europe. Entre 2008 et 2011, le nombre de jeunes ni en situation d'emploi, ni scolarisés, ni en formation (les NEET) a très fortement augmenté parmi les migrants, comme le montrent les derniers chiffres de l’OCDE. Quand les jeunes immigrés trouvaient effectivement du travail, ils étaient davantage susceptibles de se retrouver en emploi à temps partiel ou en travail temporaire que leurs homologues nés dans le pays.
Néanmoins, comme les pays de l’OCDE sont confrontés au défi du vieillissement de leur population, la contribution positive des migrations au maintien de la population active, dans de nombreux pays, devrait prendre de l’importance dans les années à venir. D’ici 2015, l’immigration, à son niveau actuel, ne sera pas suffisante pour préserver les effectifs de la population d’âge actif, dans de nombreux pays de l’OCDE, en particulier dans l’Union européenne.
Les pays doivent donc s’assurer que leur jeune génération développe pleinement son potentiel. Mais généralement, les enfants d’immigrés ont de moins bons résultats à l’école et sont moins susceptibles de trouver un emploi que leurs camarades. Trop souvent, les enfants d’immigrés enregistrent de piètres performances à l’école, ont moins de chances de poursuivre leurs études jusqu’à l’université et sont davantage susceptibles de « décrocher » avant d’avoir terminé leur scolarité. Et les chiffres sont significatifs: plus de 10% des élèves de 15 ans, dans la zone de l’OCDE, sont nés à l’étranger ou ont des parents nés à l’étranger. La dernière étude PISA de l’OCDE qui mesure la performance de ce groupe d’âge montre qu’en moyenne, les élèves immigrés de la première génération ont un an de retard par rapport à leurs camarades pour les compétences de base en lecture et en mathématiques.
Dans une économie du savoir en évolution rapide, les pays peuvent difficilement se permettre de laisser se perdre le potentiel d’une partie de la population, et de nombreux pays font de gros efforts pour corriger cette situation. Au Canada, par exemple, où près de 25% des élèves sont issus de l’immigration, ces élèves obtiennent d’aussi bons résultats que leurs homologues autochtones. Et il en va de même pour les jeunes immigrés de la deuxième génération en Israël, en Irlande, au Portugal et au Royaume-Uni.
Alors, que peuvent faire les gouvernements pour s’assurer que les élèves immigrés réussissent? Une réponse consiste à veiller à ce que chacun ait un accès égal à une éducation de qualité, indépendamment de son statut social et économique, car beaucoup d’élèves immigrés sont issus de familles et de quartiers défavorisés. La langue, aussi, peut être un obstacle: plus les enfants sont âgés quand ils arrivent dans un nouveau pays, moins ils ont de chances d’obtenir de bons résultats à l’école. S’ils parlent à la maison une langue différente de celle de leur pays d’accueil, cela a aussi des répercussions sur leurs performances. De nombreux pays s’emploient à combattre ce phénomène en offrant une formation linguistique à ces enfants.
Se pose aussi le problème de la concentration des élèves immigrés dans certaines zones, notamment dans les villes, ce qui peut signifier que certains établissements ont une forte proportion d’enfants immigrés. Ainsi, les élèves les plus faibles se retrouvent tous regroupés, ce qui n’aide pas à améliorer les résultats d’ensemble.
Il existe quelques solutions efficaces et peu coûteuses comme, par exemple, le fait d’encourager les parents à s’impliquer davantage dans la vie scolaire, et de valoriser la richesse que confère une expérience différente, par exemple, en incitant ces parents à parler à la classe de leur pays et de leurs traditions, ou à apporter à l’école des costumes traditionnels ou des plats locaux. De telles mesures se sont révélées un moyen efficace d’aider les parents et les enfants à s’intégrer dans les activités scolaires, tout en réduisant le sentiment d’isolement et de discrimination.
« C’est principalement le déclin de la demande de main-d’œuvre, et non les restrictions imposées par les politiques migratoires, qui explique la chute de l’immigration pendant la crise ». (Lire le discours), Secrétaire général de l’OCDE, Angel Gurría, Lancement des Perspectives des migrations internationales 2012 de l’OCDE.
« Les travailleurs mobiles vont là où se trouvent les emplois. C’est pourquoi je veux souligner le potentiel de la mobilité de la main-d’œuvre pour aider à rééquilibrer l’offre et la demande sur différents marchés du travail des pays de l’UE ». (Lire le discours), Commissaire européen chargé de l’emploi, des affaires sociales et de l’inclusion, Lazlo Andor, Lancement des Perspectives des migrations internationales 2012 de l’OCDE.
Pour en savoir plus:
- Perspectives des migrations internationales 2012 de l’OCDE
- Résultats du PISA 2009 : Le rendement de l’apprentissage des élèves issus de l’immigration
- www.oecd.org/migration-fr
- www.oecd.org/education-fr.

Partnerships for lifelong learning in Europe: Towards greater permeability. AO/ECVL/ILEMO-LZAH/PartnershipsForLifelongLearning/010/12. The purpose of the contract is to understand and analyse how (initial) VET providers cooperate and develop partnerships within and beyond their own sector so as to support smooth individual learning progression and permeability at system level. In reviewing the development of new governance patterns, the research also addresses how education and training actors are organising themselves and cooperating with different categories of stakeholders to develop lifelong learning.
This call has been published in the Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union 2012/S 117-192782 of 21/06/2012.
Deadline of submitting tenders: 20/08/2012 (17h00 for hand-delivered tenders).
Requests for additional information/clarification should be received by 08/08/2012.
The answers to such requests, if any, will be published under this banner, therefore please visit Cedefop's website frequently for updates.
If you are downloading these documents from our website, kindly send us an e-mail (c4t-services@cedefop.europa.eu) notifying us.
Attachments: Tender Dossier - Partnerships for LLL.
2 Terms of Reference
2.1 Introduction
Recent Cedefop research activities on permeability and progression routes in the context of lifelong learning and career development revealed that education and training systems have developed different devices and mechanisms to support individuals in organising and self-defining their learning paths (see for example the work on the European Credit system for Vocational Education and Training, the European Qualifications Framework, validation, permeability and guidance principles2).
Education and training policies in Europe nevertheless still call for increased equity in education and training, increased learning opportunities and access to further professional or academic education and training for a wide range of learners (young, adult, disadvantaged groups, etc.). The recent analysis of progress towards achieving the objectives of the Strategic Framework for European cooperation in education and training (ET 2020) identifies structural weaknesses in access to higher education. “There is considerable potential to help those already in the labour force enter or re-enter higher education, to promote the transition from vocational education and training to higher education, and to improve the recognition of prior learning acquired in non-formal contexts”3 as well as remaining obstacles for lifelong learning in terms of limited learning opportunities; a lack of accessible information and support systems; and insufficiently flexible vertical and horizontal learning pathways. On the long run, enabling learning pathways means better adapting learning to the labour market needs and individual career/learning development. It can also be understood as a means to increase the employability of learners and graduates.
Lifelong learning includes all learning activity undertaken throughout life, which results in improving knowledge, knowhow, skills, competences and/or qualifications for personal, social and/or professional reasons (Cedefop, 20114). Depending upon segmentation and stratification patterns of education and training systems, envisaging permeability and progression in lifelong learning implies focusing at different interfaces. Permeability and progression might occur at the interface of different IVET segments, as well as between IVET and further education/higher education or between education/training provisions aimed at different target groups (young people, adult learners). Partnerships for lifelong learning depend upon the institutional settings and regulations within education and training systems. Characterised by different patterns of segmentation and stratification, the systems have undergone different reform endeavours. These include new definitions of responsibilities (including in some cases devolution of decision and policy making activities away from central authorities), of autonomy in decision making and practices, decentralisation/regionalisation and mergers but also increased accountability at provider levels (Cedefop, 20105). In some countries, institutional autonomy also involves funding (Bulgaria, Germany, Austria) where VET providers can increasingly take independent budgetary decisions. Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Slovakia, for example, have merged state-owned VET schools to optimise financial and human resources as well as increasing quality of, and accessibility to, VET. To reduce large-scale fragmentation of the IVET structure, the government of Hungary offered financial support to voluntary emerging VET development associations. In Denmark vocational colleges and labour market training centres were encouraged to merge to improve interaction with local and regional business and to strengthen dialogue among training providers and end-users, including both VET learners and business. In Northern Ireland, further education colleges were consolidated to provide high quality customer focused education and training, able to meet the needs of individuals and employers.
The Finnish development plans (2003-08 and 2007-12) aim at strengthening VET provider networks. These developments lead to different modes of organisation and management such as the articulation hubs in Scotland, regional education pools in Nordic countries, collaboration platforms in Germany or the extension of remits of VET providers in the Netherlands. It also leads to education and training stakeholders defining new positions in decision-making and policy implementation processes; as for instance the sector and skills councils in the UK or the competence centres in the Netherlands.
2.2 General purpose
This Cedefop study on “Partnerships for lifelong learning in Europe: Towards greater permeability” focuses on why and how education and training stakeholders engage into partnerships and networks at national and regional levels to support access and progression of learners and graduates in education and training. The study has an explorative character and shall lead to an analysis of how far partnerships are emerging or have emerged since 2000 as a new mode of VET governance and with which characteristics and efficiency, including in terms of employability. This study follows upon the definition of VET as applied in Cedefop study on development of VET at higher qualification levels6 and underlying learning outcomes approach to qualifications. In that study, VET offers were considered independently of their organisation anchorages. Governance in VET can be understood, by analogy and in a broad sense, as the interactions between institutions, processes and tradition that determine how power is exercised, how decisions are taken on issues of public and private concern, and how citizens have their say (Oliver, 2010).
2.3 Research questions
The general purpose of this study should be tackled by answering at least to the following questions:
1. Which are the triggers for VET stakeholders to initiate or enter partnerships leading to lifelong learning offers in terms of qualifications and education/training provisions?
2. Which models of partnerships are emerging to respond to the needs for lifelong learning offers including better articulation of different education and training offers? This question includes analysing the partnerships in terms of types of stakeholders involved and respective roles. The analysis should also relate to underlying VET governance models and traditions, and how they are evolving.
3. To which extent do VET providers seek partnerships and cooperate within and beyond their own sector? More specifically: Which main forms do these partnerships take? At which geographical and institutional level does this happen? For which purposes are partnerships established? Which are the barriers and enablers of such partnerships?
4. How do the partnerships impact on lifelong learning? In that respect impacts will be considered in a multi-level perspective (for individuals, for institutions/organisations, for VET systems, for the labour market). This includes for instance the question on how these partnerships influence the lifelong/life-wide learning of individuals (progression) and the transparency, responsiveness and relevance of VET systems.
5. How can/could the efficiency of the identified governance mode be measured? (in terms of process outputs and outcomes)
2.4 Description of tasks and methodology
2.4.1 Tasks
The study should follow a comparative and qualitative approach. It should be based both on secondary data analyses, taking into account existing research and policy documents as well as on collecting and analysing new data. In the following sections, the tasks and methodology are described in detail.
The contractor should carry out two main tasks:
a) Comparative overview of 15 European countries answering the questions as formulated in section 2.3.
This study will map and analyse different patterns of partnerships for lifelong learning. This overview includes an analysis of triggers, favourable conditions and obstacles to develop partnerships (including remedial activities). It will link to the analysis of existing and emerging governance modes in education and training. An important aspect is the analysis of contextual elements such as prevailing stratification, differentiation or segmentation patterns in education and training. The analysis focuses on VET stakeholders and shall consider how far and how labour market stakeholders or not-profit organisations (e.g. associations from the volunteering sector) are joining the partnerships. The selection of the countries by the tenderer should address different factors, such as geographical coverage, VET systems provisions and governance regimes existing in European countries (EU Member States, Norway and Liechtenstein).
This study links to the request by the European Union for an “improved coordination of policies across different sectors (education and training, labour market, social affairs, etc.) and levels (national/regional/local) in order to reduce fragmentation of lifelong learning systems, improve provision and access for individuals, and deploy resources more efficiently”8. Beyond the development of the common European tools and principles for lifelong learning (EQF, ECVET/ECTS, EQAVET, Key Competences Framework, and European guidelines on validation of non-formal and informal learning)9 the study shall identify the triggers and mechanisms for developing partnerships. This study is part of Cedefop research activities on modernisation of education and training in Europe10 and will contribute to discussions on governance in VET. It consequently links to two on-going Cedefop studies focusing on how the education and training system and the labour market cooperate and communicate in the process of defining and renewing the content and profile of VET provisions and qualifications and the role of qualifications for access to and practice in occupations and professions. This study also links to the on-going study on qualifications at level 5 of the European qualifications frameworks.
b) Development and in-depth analysis of 6 case studies.
The comparative overview will be supported by 6 case studies, which will analyse in depth how partnerships emerged (or are emerging) and develop(ed). The case studies shall illustrate the main models of partnerships for individual progression and permeability in education/training systems as identified on the basis of the comparative overview. The case studies are also intended to check on hypotheses formulated in the comparative overview. Particular attention should be paid to whether and how these partnerships contributed to increased opportunities for lifelong learning in their respective settings in terms of education/training provisions and target groups. The extent to which these partnerships indicate a change in conception and understanding of education and training shall also be analysed (impact assessment). The case studies shall include examples for partnerships developed at national and regional levels.
2.4.2 Methodology
The research should rely on a thorough analysis of national and European policy developments as well as on research. The case studies will be built into the analysis, allowing for understanding current developments and formulating conclusions for policy and practice as embedded into a grounded approach to the research issue.
- Desk research and empirical research.
The analysis on education, training and partnerships for lifelong learning will be based on literature reviews and research as well as on qualitative research methods (i.e. interviews with policy makers and experts from different sub-systems of education and training should be conducted to gather the most up-to-date developments, and any other means proposed by the contractor). For the desk research the tenderer will review the most recent relevant policy and research publications at national, European and international level and identify relevant data in countries.
The case study approach allows in-depth, multi-faceted explorations of complex issues in their real-life settings. The definition of criteria for 6 case studies is an important part of the research methodology. The contractor should address different factors and dimensions on partnerships for permeability in education and training, including triggers, obstacles and impacts on education and training as well as on labour market issues.
The contractor should envisage organising focus groups to validate and support the comparative analysis of the case studies.
- Networking with national stakeholders
The contractor is advised to assemble the team necessary to execute, manage and coordinate the study. Considering the complexity of the study, the contractor is advised to rely on a team of experts/consortia across different countries to carry out the analysis and validate the findings.
- Collaboration with Cedefop
In the different development stages, the contractor will be working in close collaboration with Cedefop’s project manager(s) responsible for this project. The research tools will be subject to discussion and approval by Cedefop’s project manager(s) responsible for the project.

Call for contributions to special edition of ZFHE Journal on quality assurance in European higher education. The ‘Zeitschrift für Hochschulentwicklung’ (ZFHE- Journal for Development of Higher Education Institutions) has launched a call for contributions for a special issue to be published in January 2013. The special issue will focus on the theme ‘In quality we trust? – investigating the impact of more than two decades of QA in European Higher Education’. Guest editors Oliver Vettori (Vienna University of Economics and Business) and Bernhard Kernegger (University of Applied Arts, Vienna) invite researchers, experts and practitioners to send in contributions on the effects and effectiveness of QA and related concepts, such as quality management or quality development.
To read the call in full, please visit the website. The deadline for contributions is 14 September 2012.

On the occasion of the UN Conference on Sustainable Development in 2012, the leaders of the international academic community are called upon to commit to the development of sustainable practices for Higher Education Institutions. They are invited to sign on to the Declaration below.
With the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, the international community committed to making every effort to ensure sustainable development for the benefit of present and future generations. The aim of the 2012 UN Conference on Sustainable Development, or Rio+20, is to secure renewed political commitment for sustainable development, assess the progress to date and the remaining gaps in the implementation of the outcomes of the major summits on sustainable development, and address new and emerging challenges.
Since Higher Education Institutions educate and train decision makers, they play a key role in building more sustainable societies and creating new paradigms. As educational institutions, they have the mission to promote development through both research and teaching, disseminating new knowledge and insight to their students and building their capabilities. Given the objectives of Rio+20, Higher Education Institutions have a special responsibility to provide leadership on education for sustainable development.
Education for sustainable development aims at enabling everyone to acquire the values, competencies, skills and knowledge necessary to contribute to building a more sustainable society. This implies revising teaching content to respond to global and local challenges. It should also promote teaching methods that enable students to acquire skills such as interdisciplinary thinking, integrated planning, understanding complexity, cooperating with others in decision-making processes, and participating in local, national and global processes towards sustainable development.
DECLARATION
"As Chancellors, Presidents, Rectors, Deans and Leaders of Higher Education Institutions and related organizations, we acknowledge the responsibility that we bear in the international pursuit of sustainable development. On the occasion of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, held in Rio de Janeiro from 20-22 June 2012, we agree to support the following actions:
    Teach sustainable development concepts, ensuring that they form a part of the core curriculum across all disciplines so that future higher education graduates develop skills necessary to enter sustainable development workforces and have an explicit understanding of how to achieve a society that values people, the planet and profits in a manner that respects the finite resource boundaries of the earth. Higher Education Institutions are also encouraged to provide sustainability training to professionals and practitioners;
    Encourage research on sustainable development issues, to improve scientific understanding through exchanges of scientific and technological knowledge, enhancing the development, adaptation, diffusion and transfer of knowledge, including new and innovative technologies.
    Green our campuses by: i) reducing the environmental footprint through energy, water and material resource efficiencies in our buildings and facilities; ii) adopting sustainable procurement practices in our supply chains and catering services; iii) providing sustainable mobility options for students and faculty; iv) adopting effective programmes for waste minimization, recycling and reuse, and v) encouraging more sustainable lifestyles.
    Support sustainability efforts in the communities in which we reside, working with local authorities and civil society to foster more liveable, resource-efficient communities that are socially inclusive and have small environmental footprints.
    Engage with and share results through international frameworks, such as the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development, led by UNESCO, the UN University system, the UN Academic Impact, the Global Compact, the UN-supported Principles for Responsible Management Education initiative and the UN Environment Programme?s Environmental Education and Training initiatives, in order to exchange knowledge and experiences and to report regularly on progress and challenges."
Les établissements d’enseignement supérieur s’engagent à des pratiques durables à l’occasion de la conférence des Nations Unies sur le développement durable, 20-22 juin 2012, Rio de Janeiro
« Nous, chanceliers, présidents, recteurs, doyens, chefs d'établissements d'enseignement supérieur et d’organisations apparentées, reconnaissons la responsabilité qui nous incombe dans l'effort international en faveur du développement durable. Dans le cadre de la Conférence des Nations Unies sur le développement durable, qui a lieu à Rio de Janeiro du 20 au 22 juin 2012, nous nous engageons à soutenir les actions suivantes:
- Enseigner les concepts de développement durable, en veillant à ce qu'ils constituent une partie du tronc commun dans toutes les disciplines afin que les futurs diplômés de l'enseignement supérieur puissent développer les compétences nécessaires pour entrer dans la vie active en étant sensibilisés au développement durable et avec une compréhension claire de la manière de parvenir à une société qui permette un développement économique, valorise les personnes, et respecte les ressources limitées de la Terre. Les établissements sont également encouragés à dispenser une formation au développement durable aux professionnels et aux praticiens.
- Encourager la recherche sur le développement durable pour améliorer la compréhension scientifique par des échanges de connaissances scientifiques et technologiques, en renforçant le développement, l'adaptation, la diffusion et le transfert des savoirs, notamment des technologies innovantes et nouvelles.
- Éco-responsabiliser nos campus : i) en réduisant l'empreinte environnementale, grâce à la rationalisation des ressources en énergie, en eau et en matériaux dans nos bâtiments et nos installations ; ii) en adoptant des pratiques d'achat durables dans nos chaînes d'approvisionnement et nos services de restauration ; iii) en offrant aux enseignants et aux étudiants des solutions de mobilité durables ; iv) en adoptant des programmes efficaces pour la réduction des déchets, le recyclage et la réutilisation, et v) en favorisant des modes de vie plus durables.
- Soutenir les efforts de développement durable dans les communautés où nous résidons, en oeuvrant avec les autorités locales et la société civile pour rendre les territoires plus agréables, plus économes en ressources, à la fois socialement inclusifs et avec une faible empreinte écologique.
- S'engager et partager les résultats par le biais de cadres internationaux, comme la Décennie des Nations Unies pour l'éducation en vue du développement durable, dont l'UNESCO est l’organisation chef de file, le réseau de l’Université des Nations Unies, l’Impact Académique des Nations Unies, le Pacte mondial, les Principes pour l’éducation au management responsable, initiative soutenue par les Nations Unies, et le programme d’éducation et de formation à l’environnement du Programme des Nations Unies pour l’Environnement, afin d'échanger des connaissances et des expériences et de rendre régulièrement compte des progrès accomplis et des défis à relever. »

Dear participant,
We are pleased to invite you to participate in our study on living, working, and studying abroad. We are interested in your experiences abroad. But we also would like to know the opinions of students who have not been abroad. We invite all current students and all former students (those who finished university not later than 5 years ago) to fill in our survey.
Please read the questions carefully. The survey mainly consists of multiple-choice questions.
All answers will remain anonymous. The results will be used for internal and scientific purposes; no answer will ever be traced back to you personally.
Answering the survey takes around 15 minutes, and you have the opportunity to win a 2 week intensive language course including 32 lessons in the exclusive Education First school in Manchester (with a total value of more than 1,000 Euros). Accommodation in a host family or residence and a meal plan are included as well as the flight and transfer are included. You can additionally win an iPad2 and an iPod Nano 8GB.
The ESNSurvey is based entirely on volunteer work of ESN members and we are grateful for your support of our research and your time to fill in the survey!
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the ESNSurvey Team: survey@esn.org.