En 2013, le Défenseur des droits a reçu plus de 100 000 demandes d’interventions ou de conseils adressés par des particuliers. Voir le rapport annuel d’activité 2013 du Défenseur des droits.
Extraits concernant l'enseignement supérieur
Refus d’inscription dans l’enseignement supérieur en raison de la nationalité
Tarik, d’origine tunisienne, est résident de longue durée en France. Il a débuté ses études de médecine en France en 2004 et poursuivi sa 6e année de médecine à Zagreb en Croatie. Il souhaitait s’inscrire dans une université française en troisième cycle du cursus d’études médicales (TCEM). Pour cela, il devait cumuler 2 conditions : jouir de la nationalité d’un Etat membre de l’Union européenne et détenir un diplôme de formation médicale de base européen. La première condition allait être remplie par l’entrée de la Croatie dans l’UE. Pour la deuxième exigence, relative à la formation professionnelle, le Défenseur a fait valoir une directive européenne qui prévoit que le résident de longue durée bénéficie de l’égalité de traitement avec les nationaux en ce qui concerne les conditions d’accès à l’éducation. Le ministère de la santé a finalement confirmé l’inscription de Tarik (dossier 11-018618).
Refus d’inscription dans l’enseignement supérieur d’un demandeur d’asile
De nationalité arménienne, Aram a déposé une demande d’asile auprès de l’OFPRA et, dans l’attente de la décision définitive, a bénéficié d’un récépissé délivré par la préfecture. Il a entamé, auprès d’une université, une procédure de validation des acquis de l’expérience aux fins de poursuivre des études. Cette validation lui a été accordée, mais son inscription à l’université n’a pas pu aboutir faute de présentation d’une « carte OFPRA ». Dans l’impossibilité de communiquer un tel document, dès lors que sa demande d’asile est toujours en cours d’instruction, Aram a sollicité un réexamen de sa situation par les services de l’université ainsi que l’intervention du Défenseur des droits, et a finalement pu s’inscrire. (dossier 12-006300).
Les actions de formation
L’action de formation du Défenseur des droits vise à sensibiliser les acteurs concernés par les activités de l’Institution, à informer les futurs agents de l’Etat sur le rôle et les pouvoirs du Défenseur des droits et à promouvoir le respect des droits et de l’égalité. Les formations menées par l’Institution s’adressent donc à un public diversifié, allant de l’étudiant au professionnel exerçant dans un des domaines d’intervention du Défenseur des droits.
Une action de formation à destination des étudiants Les formations au sein des universités et écoles sont un moyen de sensibiliser les futurs acteurs aux questions touchant aux droits fondamentaux et au rôle du Défenseur des droits.
Une convention de partenariat a été signée, le 7 février 2014, entre le Défenseur des Droits et le président de l’Université Lyon II afin de poursuivre les engagements réciproques pris en 2009 dans le cadre d’une première convention conclue par la HALDE. Cette base contractuelle qui permet d’engager un véritable travail de partenariat avec l’Université Lyon II s’articulant autour de trois volets. En premier lieu, l’Université a entrepris des démarches internes pour mieux réagir aux situations de risques discriminatoires. Celle-ci s’est concrétisée en 2011 par la création d’une cellule de veille « Egalité et prévention des discriminations ». Ce partenariat a permis, en second lieu, la mise en commun des connaissances et des compétences nécessaires en vue de la création, en 2010, d’une chaire universitaire « Egalité, Inégalités et Discriminations » qui a depuis produit une offre originale de formation initiale et de formation continue dans le cadre du Master « Inégalités et discriminations et les enjeux contemporains de l’égalité » et permis la coordination du Master européen Egales spécialisé sur les discriminations à raison du sexe. Enfin, cette coopération s’est traduite par la participation des agents du Défenseur des droits à des activités pédagogiques d’enseignement et la contribution des principaux responsables de la chaire à l’élaboration et la diffusion de guides de bonnes pratiques promus par le Défenseur des droits.
De même, une convention avec la Fondation nationale d’études politiques, qui gère Sciences Po, a été conclue le 4 novembre 2013, dans la continuité des relations initiées par la HALDE dans le cadre d’une convention signée en février 2006 pour promouvoir la recherche et l’activité d’enseignement en matière de discrimination. Initialement envisagés afin de soutenir la recherche et la formation en matière de discrimination, ces échanges ont désormais vocation à s’étendre à l’ensemble du champ de compétence du Défenseur des droits. Ainsi, de nombreux enseignements ont été développés par Sciences Po et plusieurs colloques ont été organisés dans le cadre desquels les agents du Défenseur des droits sont intervenus pour présenter l’Institution et ses domaines de compétence. Enfin, depuis 2012, le Défenseur des droits participe activement à l’expérimentation d’un programme d’immersion professionnelle, appelé « clinique juridique », qui a été engagée afin d’initier les étudiants aux dimensions concrètes de la pratique du droit. Ces deux derniers partenariats permettent à l’Institution de promouvoir la recherche et la formation dans le domaine de la lutte contre les discriminations.
Dans le cadre de sa mission de protection des droits de l’enfant, le Défenseur des droits a entrepris un travail de formation auprès de l’Ecole normale sociale, s’adressant à des étudiants de seconde année en formation d’assistant de service social. A deux reprises, en janvier et mai 2013, l’Institution est venue apporter son éclairage sur le thème de la protection de l’enfance. Le Défenseur des droits a, en outre, participé à la formation d’étudiants en Master 2 « Criminologie et droit des mineurs en difficulté » à l’Université de Bayonne. Au sein de l’Institut régional de travail social de Montrouge, 180 étudiants ont pu prendre connaissance des actions de l’Institution et des moyens déployés en matière de protection de l’enfance, dans le cadre de leur formation d’assistant de service social.
Enfin, le Défenseur des droits dispense, chaque année, des formations auprès d’étudiants de Master 2 de droit. Des interventions sont ainsi tenues sur « le contrôle extérieur des établissements pénitentiaires » dans le cadre du Master 2 « Exécution des peines et droits de l’homme » à l’université de Pau et sur la question du « contrôle de la déontologie des forces de sécurité » dans le cadre du Master 2 « Criminologie et victimologie » et « Droit pénal approfondi et sciences criminelles » à la faculté de droit et de sciences sociales de Poitiers.
La formation de stagiaires par le Défenseur des droits
Le Défenseur des droits accueille depuis plusieurs années des stagiaires universitaires issus principalement des Universités de droit, des Ecoles de formation professionnelles des Barreaux, des Ecole des Avocats, ainsi que des Instituts d’Etudes Politiques (IEP). Quelques élèves-stagiaires sont également accueillis au sein de l’Institution au cours de leur scolarité dans une école de la fonction publique (ENA, IRA, ENM).
En 2013, l’Institution a reçu 497 candidatures pour 60 offres de stage. Les 58 stagiaires sont principalement affectés dans les pôles d’instruction du Défenseur en fonction de leur candidature et de leur profil. Le stage proposé représente une première expérience professionnelle permettant d’appréhender concrètement les dossiers des réclamants qui saisissent le Défenseur des droits et d’instruire leurs dossiers, avec l’aide de leur tuteur, le plus souvent un juriste expérimenté.
Le Défenseur des droits accompagne et forme ainsi chaque année une soixantaine d’étudiants qui se destinent à des études juridiques de haut niveau, à la profession d’avocats ou qui préparent des concours de la fonction publique.
Les échanges d’expertise et de pratiques dans le cadre d’accords de partenariats
En juin 2013, le Défenseur des droits a signé un accord de partenariat avec le Centre pour l’égalité des chances et la lutte contre le racisme belge afin de consolider les liens institution - nels existant avec cette institution depuis 2005 en matière de lutte contre les discriminations.
Dans le cadre du protocole d’accord entre le Défenseur des droits et le Centre professionnel de Médiation de l’Université Saint-Joseph de Beyrouth, un cycle de formation en médiation politique a été lancé en 2013.
Le Partenariat oriental – regroupant les Ombudsmans d’Arménie, Azerbaïdjan, Géorgie, Moldavie, Ukraine, Pologne et France – a continué en 2013 avec une réunion organisée en février par la sous-commission des droits de l’Homme du Parlement européen autour des principes directeurs des Nations Unies relatifs aux entreprises et aux droits de l’Homme et l’organisation d’un séminaire par l’Ombudsman d’Ukraine à Kiev en septembre 2013. Le Défenseur des droits a poursuivi et renforcé en 2013 ses engagements au sein des réseaux dont il est membre. L’action des réseaux conduit par ailleurs à sensibiliser et interpeller les instances européennes et internationales sur des sujets d’ac - tualité en vue de les inciter à inclure ceux-ci dans leur agenda de travail et la mise en œuvre de leur stratégie. Voir le rapport annuel d’activité 2013 du Défenseur des droits.

"Higher education institutions have gained greater autonomy along with rapidly growing expectations to be responsive to societal needs and to be accountable. Within a framework of public responsibility we confirm that public funding remains the main priority to guarantee equitable access and further sustainable development of autonomous higher education institutions. Greater attention should be paid to seeking new and diversified funding sources and methods." (the Leuven/Louvain-la-Neuve Communiqué, 2009, par. 23)
The above paragraph launched the debate on funding and governance within the European Higher Education Area. Yet, there are also other referred to concepts that undergird the discussion on higher education institutions' financing and governance: the public good approach and public responsibility, social dimension, accountability, institutional autonomy and development (the 2001 Prague Communiqué, the Berlin Communiqué, the 2005 Bergen Communiqué, the 2007 London Communiqué, the 2010 Budapest-Vienna Declaration and the 2012 Bucharest Communiqué).
In Leuven/Louvain-la-Neuve, the Ministers reaffirmed their commitment to the values of institutional autonomy and academic freedom (Leuven/Louvain-la-Neuve Communiqué, 2009, par. 4). The translation of these principles in financing policies leaves room for higher education institutions to find appropriate and diverse responses to the challenges their societies are facing, under a frame of public responsibility. Strong higher education institutions, which are diverse, adequately funded, autonomous and accountable, are a premise for "strengthen(ing) Europe's attractiveness and competitiveness" (London Communiqué, 2007, par. 1.3).
On 8-9 September 2011, the first major international conference on funding of higher education in the framework of the Bologna Process was organised by the Ministry of Education and Science of Armenia under the auspices of the Polish-Armenian Co-Chairmanship of the Bologna Process in Yerevan. The conference pointed at the “funding gap” (understood as a policy gap) existing between the EHEA scope of the developments in higher education and the mostly scattered, national efforts to support/respond to these developments and associated challenges by putting in place appropriate funding policies and mechanisms.
Further on, as the outcome of the conference, two recommendations were put forward: a) to reaffirm the public responsibility [1] for funding of higher education in the context of the Bologna Process; and b) aiming to bridge the policy gap, to stimulate the creation of a European space for dialogue in the area of financing of higher education.
In Bucharest, on 17-19 October executive Unit for Financing Higher Education, Research, Development and Innovation (UEFISCDI) held an international conference "Future of Higher Education - Bologna Process Researchers' Conference (FOHE - BPRC 2011)". It brought together researchers closely related to higher education, personalities from academia, students and policy makers directly involved in research related to the Bologna Process. The conference, that focused, inter alia, on the issues of governance, financing and diversification in higher education, reaffirmed the need to further investigate these issues given their importance for the future of higher education institutions (HEIs) in EHEA.
Finally, in Bucharest, the Ministers reconfirmed their commitment to maintaining public responsibility for higher education and acknowledged the need to open a dialogue on funding and governance of higher education. Furthermore, they stressed the importance of promoting the development of appropriate funding instruments, and more efficient governance and managerial structures at HEIs. Reiterating their commitment to autonomous and accountable HEIs that embrace academic freedom, the Ministers committed to support the engagement of students and staff in governance structures at all levels (the Bucharest Communiqué, 2012).
For the period 2012-2015, seminars/peer-learning activities will be organised to discuss the ways of further developing appropriate funding instruments and improving governance and managerial structures of HEIs. At a later stage, based on the outcomes of the seminars, the BFUG will decide whether there is a need to set up an ad-hoc working group on the issue.

[1]Public responsibility does not imply that funding must come exclusively from public/state sources. Rather, it implies that the state should be responsible for a regulatory framework that ensures efficient mobilisation, allocation and use of financial resources in higher education, consistent with larger policy goals and principles. More...

The Higher Education Academy (HEA) was established in 2003 to help institutions, discipline groups and all staff provide the best possible learning experience for their students. It is currently primarily funded by the four UK funding bodies, with growing income from other sources including subscriptions from higher education institutions.
In May 2013 the funding bodies commissioned independent consultants to evaluate whether the HEA is effectively achieving the general priorities set by the funding bodies and its wider aims and objectives.  The review was also asked to consider whether the HEA is providing the funders and the sector with value for money.
Main report
Download the Independent review of the Higher Education Academy as PDF (1,016 KB)
Appendices
Download the Appendices as PDF (1,255 KB). More...

1. This letter sets out the allocation of capital funding for learning and teaching infrastructure in those further education colleges (FECs) funded directly by HEFCE, for the financial year 2014-15. No action is required in response.
2. A total of £7.74 million is available to fund activity undertaken from April 2014 until March 2015. These funds will be paid automatically in three instalments, in August 2014, November 2014 and February 2015.
Purpose of the funds
3. These allocations of capital funding are to enhance the learning experience of higher education (HE) students at FECs, by helping raise the quality of their HE learning and teaching facilities. We expect colleges to use the funds in ways that will most effectively support their strategy for HE. More...

Modernisation of Higher Education in Europe: Access, Retention and Employability
Date de publication: 22 mai 2014. Version complète: . L'essentiel: . European Press Release.
CHAPTER 4: EMPLOYABILITY AND TRANSITION TO THE LABOUR MARKET
Employability plays a central role in the European Commission's higher education reform strategy (European Commission, 2011) as well as both in the Europe 2020 (European Commission, 2010) and the Education and Training 2020 ('ET 2020') strategies. Within the ET 2020 strategy, the Council of the European Union adopted a benchmark on graduate employability in 2012. According to this benchmark, 'by 2020, the share of employed graduates (20-34 year olds) having left education and training no more than three years before the reference year should be at least 82 %'. While in this context the term 'graduates' refers not only to those finishing higher education but also to graduates with upper secondary or post-secondary, non-tertiary qualifications, both public authorities and higher education institutions have a prominent role in achieving this goal.
 European Commission policy stresses the role of higher education in equipping graduates with the knowledge and core transferable competences they need to succeed in high-skill occupations, and the importance of involving employers and labour market institutions in the design and delivery of programmes, and including practical experience in courses. It also emphasises the importance of better monitoring by institutions of the career paths of former students in order to increase the relevance of programmes (European Commission, 2011).
Against this policy background, this chapter discusses national practices aiming to enhance graduates' employability and to ease their transition to the labour market. The first section provides a brief introduction on various conceptualisations of employability, both in theory and in national practice. The second and third sections then examine some ways in which higher education institutions are seen to be able to fulfil expectations regarding labour market demand and graduates' employability. In the fourth section, the chapter turns to practices of evaluating higher education institutions' performance in these respects. The final section presents the conclusions.
4.1. Conceptualising employability
Employability is a complex concept encompassing many definitions and approaches. For this reason, this first section discusses some assumptions and limitations of the different conceptualisations of employability. In doing so, the section emphasises the importance of employability for all students and graduates, and also places employability within the widening participation agenda. The section also outlines the potential role of higher education institutions in enhancing employability, and shows how European countries define this term in their policy documents.
4.1.1. A focus on graduates' success
Definitions of employability focus on graduates' transition to the labour market after finishing higher education. There are two main types of definition: employment-centred and competence-centred. An employment-centred definition is used for example within the ET 2020 process, in the abovementioned 2012 Council conclusions on employability. These Council conclusions define employability as 'a combination of factors which enable individuals to progress towards or enter employment, to stay in employment and to progress during their career'. Similarly, within the Bologna Process, the term
is understood as 'the ability [of graduates] to gain initial meaningful employment, or to become selfemployed, to maintain employment, and to be able to move around within the labour market' (Working Group on Employability 2009, p. 5).
An alternative (or complementary) approach is to focus on the skills and competences higher education students gain during their studies. For example, Yorke (2006, p. 8.) defines employability as 'a set of achievements – skills, understandings and personal attributes – that makes graduates more likely to gain employment and be successful in their chosen occupations'. Such skills and competences are usually understood as needed (and demanded) by employers. In essence, the 'student exhibits employability in respect of a job if he or she can demonstrate a set of achievements relevant to that job' (Yorke 2006, p. 8).
There are many existing classifications of such relevant skills and competences. There are the socalled 'generic', 'transferable' or 'key skills', which are not necessarily related to specific professions, but generally enable graduates to find jobs and move around in the labour market (e.g. communication skills, entrepreneurial skills, 'learning to learn' skills, but also being able to work in a team, etc., see e.g. Teichler, 2011). In addition, there are skills and competences related to specific professions or the subject of study (e.g. medicine, law, etc.).
In terms of all definitions, however, it has to be emphasised that employability does not equal employment. Employment-centred definitions can sometimes blur the difference, especially when using employment rates as proxies for measuring employability. Competence-centred definitions – especially if formulated as in Yorke (2006) – can help to clarify the relationship between employability and employment: certain skills and competences make graduates 'more likely' to gain employment, but do not guarantee it.
Indeed, employment certainly does not only depend on the quality of education graduates had received during their studies. On the one hand, changes in the general state of the economy and the labour market are the most important determinants of job opportunities. On the other hand, there are many factors that influence the employment prospects of an individual, which means that not all graduates who received the same education have similar labour market opportunities. Such factors include the mode of study (full-time or part-time), the students' location and mobility, graduates' previous work experience as well as their age, gender, ethnicity or social class (Harvey 2001, p. 103). Regarding the last set of factors, the discriminatory practices graduates might face in the labour market are often overlooked by employability discourses (Morley, 2001). For example, as shown by Moreau and Leathwood (2006), 'non-traditional' learners (based on their ethnicity, socio-economic background, disability or other characteristics) are systematically at a disadvantage when looking for jobs in the graduate labour market (see also Gorard et al., 2006).
The policy issues related to employability therefore have a dual aspect. Firstly, it is crucial to strengthen employability for all students, and this has been identified as an issue of importance for all public authorities as well as for the EU 2020 agenda. It is also necessary to recognise that employability is an integral element of the widening participation agenda in higher education (Thomas and Jones, 2007). Widening participation does not stop at providing access to students from underrepresented groups (or in other words, to 'non-traditional' learners), but has to include measures ensuring that such students complete their studies and have a successful transition to the labour market (Ibid.). This highlights the complex role of higher education institutions in the context of employability.
4.1.2. The role of higher education institutions
A focus on graduates' labour market success necessarily leads to an 'output and outcome awareness' in higher education (Teichler 2011, p. 29). However, according to some researchers, this process may have the tendency of defining higher education output rather narrowly, overlooking a range of other individual and social outputs of higher education to concentrate on graduates' employment prospects. In this context, higher education institutions are usually perceived as having the role of 'producing' employable graduates, and in doing so, responding to the needs of the labour market. As will be shown below, there are two main perspectives in outlining employability-related outcomes in higher education. Putting emphasis on the needs of the labour market focuses more on the demandside (what higher education institutions need to respond to), while an emphasis on employable graduates implies a more supply-side perspective (what higher education institutions need to achieve in terms of output). However, in most cases, it is difficult to disentangle these different perspectives. In terms of concrete implementation, employment-centred definitions of employability leave higher education institutions' role relatively open. Many different practices at universities can increase graduates' chances of finding employment soon after graduation: examples include embedding practical training and work placements in study programmes, involving employers in teaching and curriculum development, or providing career guidance to all students (see also Section 4.3.2). Definitions focusing on skills and competences, on the other hand, foresee a more concrete task for higher education institutions. Besides providing profession-specific teaching and skills, they have to develop the 'generic', 'transferable' or 'key skills' of students. How higher education institutions achieve this, however, remains open. Institutions (or faculties, departments) can decide to 'embed' such skills and competences within existing courses (through new teaching methods, for example); or else, they can include specific courses in the curriculum aiming to develop generic skills (Mason, Williams and Cranmer, 2009).
In the context of the widening participation agenda, it is also important to highlight the role of higher education institutions in enhancing the employability of non-traditional learners. According to Thomas and Jones (2007, p. 23), besides providing access to relevant work experience for students with 'nontraditional' backgrounds, higher education institutions have a particular responsibility to ensure that non-traditional learners can receive (targeted) advice and career guidance throughout the whole student lifecycle (i.e. from the very beginning of a student career). Such guidance can contribute to: 1) developing students' awareness about employability; 2) improving the confidence and self-esteem of students; and 3) developing the appropriate job search and application skills (Ibid.). In this way, guidance can help bring down the 'indirect' barriers non-traditional learners can face on the labour market: the fact that due to their background and earlier education opportunities, they might not evaluate labour market reality and their own competences well, and as a consequence, they often exclude themselves from getting the matching graduate jobs (11) (Thomas and Jones, 2007).
4.1.3. Defining employability in European countries
After providing an insight into potential definitions of employability and higher education institutions' role in this context, this section examines how European countries reflect on this concept in their steering documents for higher education.
Very few countries define employability directly or use the term explicitly. Even translating the originally English term into many other languages might be difficult. For this reason, this section looks at employability-related conceptualisations of higher education institutions' roles instead of examining
direct definitions.
As was mentioned above, two main perspectives on higher education institutions' roles can be distinguished: a more demand-side perspective focusing on the needs of the labour market, and a more supply-side perspective focusing on graduates' employability. Certainly, these perspectives are interlinked, but countries can choose to emphasise one over the other. In a number of countries, both approaches may exist, with different emphases given according to the missions of specific institutions – some more focused on specific professional education than others. Figure 4.1 illustrates the different perspectives and provides some country examples.
The more demand-side perspective focuses on higher education institutions' need and responsibility to respond to labour market demands. This responsibility is either stated generally, or specifically refers to the need to consult employers or employers' organisations when designing study programmes. In this case, such consultation ensures that labour market information and demand is embedded in higher education curricula. Countries only generally referring to the higher education sector's need to respond to labour market demand are Estonia, Spain, Hungary, Romania, the United Kingdom (some universities refer to the demand more specifically than others) and Liechtenstein. Countries specifically mentioning the need to involve or consult employers in their steering documents are Belgium (French Community), Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Greece, Ireland, France, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Austria (only universities of applied sciences), Poland, Slovenia, Montenegro, Norway and Turkey.
In the second case, higher education institutions are regarded as responsible for producing 'employable' graduates. Regarding graduates' employability, the two approaches discussed above (employment-centred and competences-centred) can also be distinguished when looking at the policy and steering documents for higher education in European countries.
Employment-centred approaches focus directly on graduates' employment prospects: higher education institutions are responsible for preparing graduates for employment. In these cases, higher education institutions are often evaluated based on graduate employment rates. This employmentcentred approach can be found in Belgium (Flemish Community), Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Ireland, Greece, Spain, France, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia, Slovakia and the United Kingdom (Scotland).
Competences-centred approaches, on the other hand, refer to the responsibility of higher education institutions to develop the skills and competences of graduates necessary to find a job. Worth noting, however, that employment-centred and competences-centred approaches are not contradictory and often exist in parallel. In these cases, the competence-centred approach specifies ways for higher education institutions to enhance graduate employability. The competence-centred approach can be found in the Czech Republic, Germany, Ireland, Greece, Spain, Italy, Lithuania, Malta, Austria, Slovenia, Sweden, the United Kingdom (12), Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Turkey.
Irrespective of their emphasised perspective or approach, European countries usually discuss employability-related concerns from the perspective of higher education institutions or the student population as a whole. This aspect of the employability agenda is thus a relatively high profile policy issue.
The large majority of countries pay no particular attention to employability with regard to specific, underrepresented social groups. The exceptions are Estonia, Greece and the United Kingdom. In Estonia, there are measures, for example, for extending the study period for students not proficient enough in the official language, and for people with disabilities or small/disabled children. In Greece, specific actions aiming to increase students' practical training include special arrangements for students with special needs, minorities, foreigners or students coming from other vulnerable social groups. In the United Kingdom (England, Wales and Northern Ireland), students with disabilities have specific access to careers education, information and guidance. In addition, in England, in 2010, the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) provided funding for a programme to support internships for disadvantaged students with the aim of widening access to the professions.
4.2. Responding to labour market needs
In their steering documents for higher education, several countries emphasise that higher education institutions should respond to the needs of the labour market. There are basically two sources of information about such labour market demand: labour market forecasts and employers or employers' organisations. This section discusses related practices in turn.
4.2.1. Labour market forecasting as an information source
Labour market forecasting is a common way to anticipate labour market needs in terms of skills demand and supply. Labour market forecasting is usually conducted by occupation and qualification levels. According to Cedefop (2008), such forecasting practices mainly serve two purposes: they have a 'policy function', in which they inform policy planning; and they have an 'information function', in which they aid guidance and information services on labour market trends. In the case of higher education institutions, this means that labour market forecasting can potentially influence programme planning and management such as designing study programmes, determining the number of state funded places, or allocating public funding. In addition, guidance and information services can guide (potential) students in orienting themselves towards more 'demanded' fields of study.
Certainly, todays' global 'knowledge economy' can change much faster than labour market forecasts can predict. Labour market forecasts are always based on past trends and cannot foresee bigger shifts in skills demand due to changes in economic reality (e.g. economic crises). Higher education graduates themselves can change the world of work and their innovative capacity is hard to take into account. In addition, while labour market forecasts tend to be national, in the EU, labour markets are becoming increasingly 'European'. Furthermore, as was discussed above, competences students gain during their higher education studies might be more important than the qualification they receive in the end (13). Therefore, relying on labour market forecasting has its own limitations.
 Besides a few exceptions (Bulgaria, Croatia, Portugal and Liechtenstein), labour market forecasting exists at national and/or regional levels in most European countries (14). As Figure 4.2 shows, labour market forecasts are conducted in an ad hoc manner in 10 countries, while there is a regular, established system in 13 countries. In Lithuania, a regular labour market forecasting system is currently under development.
However, using such labour market information systematically in higher education policy planning is relatively rare in European countries. Only 11 countries (Ireland, France, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Finland, the United Kingdom, Montenegro and Norway) reported that their education authorities take account of labour market information in higher education planning and management.
Most commonly, information from labour market forecasting is used for determining the number of publicly funded study places in some or all the programmes. This is the case in seven education systems: Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Finland, the United Kingdom (Scotland), Montenegro and Norway. Alternatively, in Ireland, Poland and the United Kingdom (England), additional funding is allocated to areas with identified skills needs or to subjects considered to be 'strategically important'.
In Ireland, the Future Skills Needs reports inform the development of specific targeted funding and education provision to address emerging skills needs. Such initiatives include the 'Springboard' and the 'ICT skills conversion' programmes. Springboard provides free part-time higher education courses for unemployed people in areas where there are identified labour market skills shortages or employment opportunities. The ICT graduate skills conversion programmes are being provided for graduate jobseekers as part of the joint industry Government ICT Action Plan to build the domestic supply of high level ICT skills.
In the United Kingdom, the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) monitors the availability of programmes in socalled ‘strategically important and vulnerable subjects’ (SIVS), which include science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM), modern foreign languages, and quantitative social science. The Government is concerned to prioritise the subjects that require support to avoid undesirable reductions in the scale of provision. In 2012, HEFCE commissioned research into how other countries or states with similar higher education funding and student finance systems to England have identified and mitigated risks towards particular subjects or skills, and the policy approach adopted. HEFCE also provides additional funding for the teaching of high-cost STEM subjects, including a supplement for those which cost the most to deliver (chemistry, physics, chemical engineering and mineral, metallurgy and materials engineering). This has increased the overall level of funding for STEM teaching from 2012/13. In addition, HEFCE funded 'Routes into Languages', a £7.3 million programme that aimed to encourage the take-up of modern foreign language courses in England and which ran until July 2013.
4.2.2. The involvement of employers
Another way of including labour market information in higher education is through consulting or involving employers, employers' organisations and business representatives in the various steps of developing and evaluating higher education study programmes. Employers' participation is a more decentralised mechanism for ensuring that study programmes meet the needs of the labour market. This section considers the involvement of employers in three areas: curriculum development, teaching, and participation in decision-making or consultative bodies at national, regional, sectoral or institutional level. Employers' participation in external quality assurance will be discussed in Section 4.1.
The involvement of employers in at least one of these three areas is a requirement in 18 education systems. Out of these 18 education systems, employers' participation in decision-making or consultative bodies is required in 16 (see Figure 4.3c). These bodies can be national (e.g. in France, Latvia, Slovenia or Finland), regional (e.g. in Italy), sectoral (e.g. in Montenegro) or institutional (e.g. in Lithuania, Austria, Sweden or Norway). The involvement of employers in curriculum development is compulsory in seven education systems; their participation in teaching is a requirement in five. Yet, employers can be involved in higher education planning and programme development even if it is not required by central authorities. In practice, the involvement of employers in curriculum development and teaching, or their participation in decision-making or consultative bodies is much more widespread than what is prescribed by law. Again, as Figure 4.3c shows, involving employers is the most common in decision-making bodies at different levels: employers typically participate in such bodies in 22 education systems. Employers are involved in curriculum development in 19 education systems, and they frequently participate in teaching in 15 education systems.
Employers' participation can be facilitated by university-business cooperation projects. Through financial means, governments can provide incentives for both higher education institutions and business organisations to develop innovative projects together. In some countries (e.g. in Denmark and the United Kingdom), cooperation projects involving higher education institutions and enterprises can receive such financial support directly. Alternatively, other countries have established specific centres (e.g. Innovation and Liaison Offices in Greece and Centres of Technology Transfer in Latvia), the role of which is to facilitate cooperation between universities and businesses.
The Danish government has allocated DKK 40 million (EUR 5.3 million) for 2013 to support innovation projects at university colleges and business academies in cooperation with public and private enterprises. The projects are aimed at motivating widespread practice-based innovation and knowledge activities. The projects will focus on specific practical challenges in enterprises and involve teachers and students in strengthening the students’ innovative competencies and develop education programmes. In order to participate, enterprises will have to contribute with significant self-financing to the projects.
In Greece, the 'Education and Lifelong Learning' Operational Programme within the National Strategic Reference Framework (2007- 2013) finances Liaison Offices. Liaison Offices are meant to facilitate connections between the education sector and the labour market by developing channels of communication, networking and collaboration with businesses, employers' organizations and the wider society, as well as through the provision of comprehensive support and guidance to students and graduates for planning their further studies and personal career. The overall budget of the action amounts to EUR 10 million. The number of students benefiting from the program operating in 39 HEIs exceeds 150 000.
In addition, Innovation and Entrepreneurship Units aim to strengthen cooperation between academia and industrial partners, and to promote research in entrepreneurship-related fields. Their goal is to develop students' basic, as well as specific entrepreneurial skills and competences. The overall budget of the action amounts to EUR 9.97 million. 33 units have been created so far, while more than 37 000 students have benefited.
In Latvia, Centres of Technology Transfer have been established, partly financed from European Structural funds. Their aim is to facilitate collaboration between universities, industry and scientific institutions. There are nine such centres organised in Latvia. In the United Kingdom, the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) operates Higher Education Innovation Funding (HEIF) worth £150 million per year to incentivise HEIs to increase their interactions with businesses, public and third sector organisations, community bodies and the wider public. The funding is designed to support the range of knowledge exchange activities that result in economic and social impact. Currently a high policy priority is to encourage activity that can help the country’s economic growth.
In some countries, there are also special degree programmes designed specifically to meet employers' demand, where curricula are developed with the involvement of employers.
In France, the professional bachelor degree, established in 1999, is issued by the university and has the prime objective of ensuring student employability. The qualification provides an opportunity for training designed and organised through close partnerships with employers. The university is required to present an application to establish a professional bachelor programme, and this is examined by a national expert commission that operates for a three year mandate and involves equal representation from experts appointed for their professional expertise and university representatives.
In the United Kingdom (England, Wales and Northern Ireland), foundation degrees, which have been available since 2001/02, are two-year higher education qualifications offering flexible and accessible ways of studying for skills that are in demand among employers. In addition, Higher Education Funding Council for England also has a workforce development programme, one of whose goals is the design and delivery of higher education courses in partnership with employers. Details of employer engagement projects focused on the development and delivery of higher education programmes with the cooperation of employers are available from the HEFCE website (15).
4.3. Enhancing graduate employability
A more supply-side perspective on employability in higher education concerns graduates' employment prospects and/or their competences enhancing their employability. This section considers two main ways of improving graduates' employability: inserting practical training and work placements into study programmes on the one hand, and career guidance provision on the other.
4.3.1. Practical training and work placements
Practical training and work placements are regarded as key elements in enhancing graduates' employability. Data from both European comparative studies and national reports show that students who participated in practical training before graduation are more likely to find jobs than their counterparts without relevant work experience (see e.g. Blackwell et al., 2001; Garrouste and Rodrigues, 2012; Mason, Williams and Cranmer, 2009; van der Velden and Allen, 2011). Thomas and Jones (2007) also emphasise the importance of work experience for non-traditional learners. Therefore, it is important to look at whether and how European countries provide incentives for higher education institutions to include structured work experiences or practical training in their study programmes.
In the European Union, Directive 2005/36/EC on the recognition of professional qualifications (16) regulates the embedding of practical training into certain, professionally oriented study programmes (e.g. for medical or pharmaceutical studies). In the majority of countries, the inclusion of practical training is required for such degrees.
For other study programmes, higher education institutions are mostly free to decide whether they include such structured work experiences and whether they are optional or compulsory. However, some countries do limit this freedom of higher education institutions. In some cases, such limitation can relate to certain types of institutions. For example, in Denmark, practical training is required at Academies of Professional Higher Education and University Colleges, but not at universities. In other countries, practical training is required for certain degree types (e.g. for the licence professionnelle in France). In Lithuania, all 1st cycle students are required to undergo practical training. In Montenegro, in the accreditation process of a new study programme, higher education institutions are obliged to enclose pre-agreements on business cooperation regarding students' practical training.
The proportion of students participating in practical training or work placements is not available in the large majority of countries. Among the countries with available data, participation is among the highest (100 %) in Finland, where all first-cycle polytechnic courses include at least three months long work placement period, and practical training is compulsory for some university degrees. Participation is also quite high in Lithuania (100 % of 1st cycle students participate), Latvia (86 % of 1st cycle and 14 % of 2nd cycle students gain work experience through practical training) and Italy (nearly 60 % of 1st cycle students and 56 % of 2nd cycle students participate).
However, besides such – mostly short – structured work placements, also other arrangements exist with the aim of ensuring that students gain professional experience during their studies. For example, in France, students can participate in a dual system (alternance) which combines theoretical studies in higher education institutions with professional experience gained at work. In this case, students have work contracts throughout their studies. Currently, 7 % of higher education students and 5 % of university students study in such an arrangement.
It is not only through regulations that governments can encourage work experience to become an integral part of an increasing number of higher education programmes. Many countries provide financial incentives to higher education institutions and employers alike to increase the number of available traineeships. These initiatives are open to all students, and in most cases, this means that the costs of practical training are – at least partly – covered by public sources (e.g. in Belgium (French Community), Bulgaria, Greece, France, Croatia, Italy, Lithuania, Portugal, Finland and the United Kingdom). Targeted initiatives focusing on disadvantaged students exist only in the United Kingdom (England).
In Bulgaria, the 'Student placements' project run within the Human Recourses Development Operational Program aims to ensure practical training in real working environment and is open for both full-time and part-time students. Funding is provided for the remuneration of students, academic mentors from universities and mentors from the employer.
In Greece, within the Operational Programme on 'Education and Lifelong Learning' of the National Strategic Reference Framework (2007-2013), a framework of incentives is developed, both to increase the number of participating students, and to attract more businesses to host internships. The overall budget of the action amounts to EUR 82.5 million. In addition, Innovation and Liaison offices operating in HEIs also organise the practical training of students.
In Croatia, the Employment Promotion Act (2012) provides opportunity for employers to contract, up to a total of 12 months, higher education graduates with no prior work experience using the so called 'agreement on professional training for work without employment' scheme. During this period, employers are exempt from paying any taxes and other contributions (health insurance, etc.) for these employees and such trainees receive from the state the monthly fee of about EUR 200. The aim of this is to enable higher education graduates without prior work experience to obtain some initial work experience and hence to make them more attractive to the labour market.
In Lithuania, the implementation of practical training is incentivized via the National Study Programme, through which support is provided for the practical training of students of both study cycles and all areas of study in private and public enterprises, institutions and organisations. The goal is to develop the entrepreneurial skills of students as well as to create partnerships between HEIs and various social partners. Eligible applicants for this support are associations of employers in partnership with HEIs, institutions and organisations. In addition, scientific practices of academically-oriented students are supported via the Researcher’s Career Programme. The measure finances placements and practical training of students of both cycles and all areas of study in leading scientific groups and institutions of the country.
In Poland, a new programme was launched in 2013 by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education and National Research and Development Centre (a governmental agency), aimed at supporting higher education institutions in providing internships for students. The funds are granted through a competitive procedure between institutions that have created the best training programmes with industry. The pilot edition of the new programme will fund at least three months training at companies for approximately 10 000 students. The budget for the programme is PLN 50 million (ca. EUR 12 million).
In the United Kingdom, the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) has run a number of funding programmes designed to help businesses find the skills they need and also help graduates find the skills that lead to employment, e.g. internship schemes for undergraduates and graduates. In one of such programmes, HEFCE provided £1 million to 30 HEIs in 2010 to support undergraduate internships for disadvantaged students to work in professional organisations, to widen access to the professions. 850 internships were completed under this initiative.
Since 2010, the Adopt-an-Intern programme is run by the Centre for Scottish Public Policy to match graduates with businesses, offering paid, meaningful and career-enhancing internships in Scotland.
4.3.2. Career guidance
Providing labour market information, career guidance or mentoring students is another way of enhancing the employability of graduates. As mentioned above, career guidance is regarded as particularly important for non-traditional learners (Thomas and Jones, 2007), especially if it is provided throughout the whole student lifecycle.
As Figure 4.4 shows, career guidance is available throughout the whole student lifecycle in higher education institutions in almost all countries. The exceptions are the German-speaking Community of Belgium, where career guidance is only available in the last year before graduation; the Czech Republic, Latvia and Portugal, where higher education institutions are fully autonomous in their decision to establish career guidance services; Croatia, where only external services are available; Malta, where only some students have access to internal career guidance services, but all of them may access external services.
Guidance services tend to be open to all students, and respond to individual student demands. The only countries reporting targeted guidance are Greece and the United Kingdom (England, Wales and Northern Ireland). In Greece, Liaison Offices responsible for career guidance and counselling provide specific services to students and graduates coming from vulnerable social groups in order to develop their professional qualifications and to support their professional integration. In the United Kingdom (England, Wales and Northern Ireland), students with disabilities are particularly supported to ensure that they have access to the same provision as other students.
Guidance services in higher education institutions are less widespread for graduates/alumni. As Figure 4.5 depicts, alumni career services are available to all students in higher education institutions in 18 education systems, and some graduates can access such services in eight. In France, besides general alumni guidance services, there are also specific graduate placement services in the grandes écoles.
Graduate career guidance is externalised completely in the German-speaking Community of Belgium, Estonia, Croatia, Lithuania, Malta and Sweden. No such guidance services are available in Ireland, Romania, and Norway.
4.4. Evaluating employability
Higher education institutions' employability performance is often subject to external evaluation. Evaluation processes on the quality of higher education provision can include criteria on employability. Most prominently, employability criteria can form part of external quality assurance processes. In addition, several countries have established other procedures of evaluating how well higher education institutions perform in 'producing' employable graduates. This section provides an overview about such evaluation processes.
4.4.1. Quality assurance
Quality assurance is the main mechanism through which education authorities can encourage higher education institutions to enhance the employability of their graduates. Indeed, as Figure 4.6 shows, in the large majority of countries, higher education institutions are obliged to submit employability-related information to quality assurance agencies before programme accreditation or for the continuing evaluation of institutions and/or programmes. Employability-related information is considered optionally during the evaluation process in nine education systems. This may also include systems such as in Hungary, where accreditation procedures consider employability, but there is no minimum requirements connected to the criteria. Such criteria do not form part of quality assurance procedures in six countries.
Employability-related quality standards can focus on a variety of issues. Higher education institutions can be required to show that their programmes are relevant for the labour market answering an existing demand (e.g. in Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Italy, Austria (in case of accreditation, curricula for universities of applied sciences, not obligatory for universities) and Slovenia). In other cases, higher education institutions have to provide proof that they involve employers or include employers' perspectives in programme development (e.g. in Belgium (French Community), Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, Austria, Poland, Finland, Switzerland and Norway). In several countries, higher education institutions have to regularly submit data on the employment of their graduates or have to prove that they have a monitoring or tracking system in place (e.g. in Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, Ireland, Greece, Spain, Italy, Latvia and Lithuania). In Italy, the quality assurance agency verifies the presence of student services that can provide support for the labour market transition of graduates.
Another way of ensuring that employability criteria – the labour market relevance of programmes or the involvement of employers in programme development – are considered during the evaluation process is through the participation of employers in external quality assurance procedures. Employers participate in external quality assurance processes in around half of the education systems (see Figure 4.7). In almost all countries where employers participate, they are required to do so. The exceptions are the German-speaking Community of Belgium and Iceland, where employers are involved in external quality assurance without any formal requirements.
4.4.2. Other evaluation processes and financial schemes
Besides formal quality assurance procedures, several countries have established other processes of evaluating study programmes based on employability criteria. The basis of such evaluation is most often student and graduate surveys, where students and/or graduates can evaluate their study programme as well as can provide details on their transition to the labour market. Examples of graduate surveys and graduate tracking systems are discussed in detail in Section 4.3. Besides students and graduates, another source of information can be employers. Employers' surveys can reveal how satisfied employers are with the level of competences of their employees recruited after their studies and how well those competences match job requirements. Employers’ surveys have been conducted in many European countries (17). Ireland, for example, organised the first National Employers’ Survey in 2012, and aims to establish a regular system for evaluating higher education institutions.
Finally, another information source can be higher education institutions themselves. Besides organising their own graduate surveys or tracking systems, they can also publish their plans on how they intend to improve the employability of their graduates. For example, in the United Kingdom, higher education institutions funded by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) have been requested to write employability statements, short summaries of what they offered to their students to support their employability and their transition into employment and beyond. One prominent goal of setting up such evaluation processes is to make employability-related information on higher education study programmes public. This can inform current and future students on their potential career prospects. For example, Bulgaria established a Universities Ranking System (18), where graduates’ employment and income form part of the composite indicator on ‘career and relevance to labour market’. Or else, in the United Kingdom, the Unistats (19) website compares higher education course data, enabling prospective students to compare information on a course by course basis (see also Section 4.3). Information includes previous students’ satisfaction, professional body accreditation, graduate employment destinations and salary, as well as higher education institutions’ employability statements. In addition, the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) publishes performance indicators for higher education institutions, one of which is the employment rate of graduates.
Several countries (e.g. the Czech Republic, Estonia (from 2016 onwards), Spain, Italy, Austria, Poland and Finland) have also developed (or are in the process of developing) systems of performance-based or purpose-specific funding, where employability-related information is not only made public, but relevant criteria can also influence the funding of higher education institutions.
In the Czech Republic, the budget that HEIs receive directly from the state is composed of many items. About 80 % of the overall budget from the state is the so-called normative part. About 75 % of the normative part is allocated by a funding formula based on the number of students enrolled; and about 25 % of the normative part is allocated by the so-called qualitative indicators, one of them being the level of employment of graduates.
In Spain, the labour insertion of graduates is one element to be taken into account in the funding of universities. Indicators to measure labour insertion include: the graduate employment rate one year after graduation; the graduate employment rate five years after graduation; and the percentage of graduates who five years after graduation achieve a higher level of income than the population with secondary studies. Nevertheless, how this information affects the universities' funding depends on the Autonomous Communities.
In Italy, internships during the study programme and the proportion of employed graduates one year after graduation on the total number of graduates of the same year are an indicator used when assigning financial resources to higher education institutions. In Austria, public universities are funded by global budgets consisting of the basic budget and the higher education area structural funds. The basic budget is to be negotiated under performance agreements (Leistungsvereinbarungen) concluded between the individual university and the Federal Ministry of Science, Research and Economy every three years. In such performance agreements, universities have to point out their plans, e.g. for the improvement of employability. Universities are then evaluated based on these agreements.
In Finland, a part of polytechnics' state funding is based on their employability performance, starting in 2014. For example, completed degrees are part of performance-based funding. Also indicators on R&D and influence on regional development and cooperation with the working life are used in calculation of performance-based funding.
4.4.3. Career tracking of graduates
Graduate surveys that rely on the self-assessment of graduates are considered to be the most accurate tools for evaluating the employability of higher education graduates (van der Velden & van Smoorenburg, 1997). Career tracking surveys (or in other words, tracer studies) do not only provide the means to measure the percentage of graduates finding employment after graduation, but they are also able to describe the quality of jobs, the length of the job search period, graduates' job satisfaction, and the match between graduates' skills and job requirements (see Teichler, 2011). Furthermore, based on graduate surveys, it is possible to conduct analyses on the relative impact of graduates' individual characteristics and the higher education programme they attended (Ibid.). This way, tracer studies are useful tools for a multi-dimensional evaluation of employability in higher education. Few comparative graduate surveys (20) exist at European level. Their advantage is the comparability of information across countries. However, these surveys took place only in a limited number of countries and only once, which does not allow for comparisons across time. In addition, it is more difficult for such information to be channelled back to higher education institutions. Therefore, graduate surveys are also needed to be conducted regularly at national level in order to allow for an efficient flow of information between graduates, higher education institutions/programmes and education authorities.
With the exception of Croatia and Montenegro, graduate surveys exist in every education system participating in this report, at least at the level of (some) higher education institutions. However, in Montenegro, a new law foresees an obligation for higher education institutions to conduct such surveys regularly. As Figure 4.8 shows, regular graduate surveys at national/regional level exist in 14 education systems, while ad hoc national/regional surveys take place in six. In Belgium, at the level of the French Community, a regular system for the tracking of graduates is currently being developed. Some examples of graduate tracking systems (21) are summarised in Figure 4.9.
However, only in a few education systems do education authorities make a systematic use of the information collected on the basis of graduate surveys. Most often, graduate surveys are used in quality assurance or other evaluation processes of higher education study programmes (e.g. in Estonia, Spain, France, Italy, Slovakia, the United Kingdom, Iceland and Norway). In Poland, such a system is starting. In addition, information and guidance services can use information to guide prospective and current higher education students.
4.5. Experience from site visits
Enhancing employability at universities
All the eight universities that were visited reported an increase in attention to issues of employability in recent years. However, there were notable differences related to study fields, with technically-oriented faculties showing a tendency to develop more systematic approaches to issues of employability than arts and humanities faculties. Nevertheless, all universities reported a general trend towards more systematic attention to facilitating the transition of graduates to the labour market, with some notable good practice examples found in places where they might not be anticipated.
The approach to issues of employability was often tied to the institutions 'position' in the university world. For example, at the highly ranked technical University of Aachen, while the employment of graduates is considered a matter of great importance, there is a perception that all graduates will have acquired the knowledge and skills that equip them for the labour market, and that there is therefore no need to pay more specific attention to this issue. In some universities, such as the Tallinn Technical University, employability has been taken up and addressed in institutional policy and practice following developments in national policy. At the University of Jyväskylä, employability issues are embedded in an integrated policy approach which aims to create more links to regional companies, and also encourages students to undertake voluntary projects to enhance skills needed in working life.
However, perhaps the most striking example of innovative thinking towards employability was found at the Athens University of Economics and Business (AUEB). Here change had clearly been accelerated by the extremely difficult economic, political and social environment, with Greece experiencing a reality described by the University Rector not merely as economic crisis but rather as structural economic collapse. Athens University of Economics and Business is a specialised university and the oldest of its kind in Greece (established in 1920) providing education in all three cycles in the fields of Economics, Business Administration, Informatics, Statistics, Marketing, Accounting and Finance. While the university is highly ranked with an excellent reputation both in the country and internationally, the focus of discussion was on initiatives related to supporting the employability of students in a reality where the labour market nationally has practically ceased to exist. Students have therefore been forced to change their labour market expectations radically. With little hope of public sector employment, or indeed of gaining typical graduate employment in the private sector, students have become increasingly interested in creating new forms of employment for themselves, and supporting each other in developing the skills that they would need. An extremely significant shift had consequently occurred at the university with support being channelled to a dynamic blend of employability and entrepreneurship. Very interesting interlinked services have been developed on careers innovation/entrepreneurship and internships.
All of these services have been developed using European structural funds by young, dynamic and highly motivated staff. Vitally, however, all services have also been guided by experienced academic staff, thus ensuring a link with the teaching and research work at the university. Staff involved clearly have a very student-centred approach. The three services were also clearly well integrated with one another and have had a great impact.
Through the career services not only is information and training provided to students throughout their studies, but the university has also been working as an agency for matching specific candidates with companies. It was reported that many students found their first employment in the company where they had had an internship. The unit also undertakes research, with a regular survey on the employment status of graduates. The office is also very active in using social media, such as Facebook and LinkedIn, to provide information and follow the progression of graduates.
In recent years, a new focus has been on promoting innovation and entrepreneurship. The university provides courses, but also seminars on different aspects of starting new businesses, with plans in the pipe-line for the establishment of a Centre for entrepreneurship. The students we met had been extraordinarily active in internships, developing their own start-ups, contributing to research projects, supporting fellow students in their endeavours, and even in advising their peers from other countries. The provision of internships was very actively supported by a specific service for the whole university, even if the internship was only mandatory in one department – and the students would receive a nominal remuneration from the government for their work. The students were prepared through seminars on how to apply, how to behave during an interview and their application was put in a database where once the application/CV had been approved was visible to potential companies who are looking for an intern. The internship lasts two-three months and there are more than 1 500 companies in the database following a recent effort to include SMEs. The administrators explained that many students found their first job through their internship, and a particular focus has also been placed on the importance of mobility. The Erasmus programme in particular is being used to offer internships in other European countries.
Another example of changes to more emphasis on employability issues can be found at the University of Jyväskylä, where it is a common theme flowing throughout the university course provision, and students were also reported to find it increasingly important to prepare what they become after finishing their studies. Therefore, there are attempts to make career guidance available throughout the studies and to include alumni both as advisors for curricula development, but also as mentors for students.
Small modules that support third mission engagement have been introduced and 1-2 ECTS are given for doing projects that have external engagement – one such project was companies that have a problem that they would like to have solved by students. An e-portfolio has been introduced which helps the student identify not their academic skills, but also other skills that are needed in the labour market. Internships are in one form or another becoming increasingly popular and efforts are made to collect information on these and make them available to students. Career service helps students in their search for employment: help to define their skills and their attitude – help with writing CVs, job applying skills. One specific tool is the above-mentioned eportfolio, another is to encourage a structured path for obtaining general skills in a variety of courses.
The portfolio is developed with both academic and extra-curricular activities, such as voluntary work which can be included in the portfolio. Their use is voluntary, so they are not used yet by so many students. Some courses at the university are labour-market oriented, or focus on obtaining skills through establishing summer school or other practical engagement in society. They are called expertise courses that are focused on career and generic skills development. There is a new course on entrepreneurship as it is expected that more graduates will become self-employed.
Conclusions
All European countries participating in this report engage in one form or another in improving the employability of higher education graduates. However, approaches differ, as does the level of engagement. As Section 1 showed, there are differences between countries in focusing on labour market demand or supply, though these approaches are often inseparable. In addition, some countries take an employment-centred approach measuring employability through graduate employment rates, others emphasise equipping students with competences relevant for the labour market, and several countries combine the two perspectives.
In addition, differences between countries exist regarding the measures through which they are encouraging higher education institutions to improve their employability performance. The most common way to promote the employability agenda is through quality assurance: 23 education systems require higher education institutions to submit employability-related information in quality assurance procedures. In addition, several countries have established alternative evaluation procedures to provide incentives for higher education institutions to improve their employability performance. One prominent mechanism through which authorities expect better results is making employability-related information public for both current and prospective students. Another, more direct mechanism is to link public funding levels with employability performance. In this latter case, partial funding of higher education institutions depends on whether they focus on enhancing their graduates' employability.
When looking at the detailed measures aiming to improve graduates' employability, similar differences between policy approaches can be detected. One prominent approach is a regulatory one: education authorities simply make it compulsory for higher education institutions to implement certain practices. For example, in 21 education systems, institutions are required to involve employers in at least one of the following areas: curriculum development, teaching, participation in decision-making bodies and external quality assurance. Or else, several countries oblige higher education institutions to include practical training in (some) higher education study programmes.
Another approach many education authorities take is providing financial incentives for higher education institutions to establish certain institutional practices. For example, authorities can fund university-business cooperation projects in order to increase the involvement of employers in higher education study programmes. Or else, they can provide funding for students' practical training in order to improve their work-related skills.
However, no matter which approach education systems take, they mostly target students or graduates as a whole, without concentrating on specific – disadvantaged – groups of students. This shows that the widening participation agenda still needs to be extended to cover employability policies as well. Evaluating the impact of existing measures and approaches is not straightforward. One way to do so is through establishing regular graduate surveys at both national and European levels. National level graduate surveys can provide better feedback for individual higher education institutions, while graduate surveys conducted on a European scale can provide a comparative insight into the effectiveness of different policy approaches.
Issues of employability were taken into account in all eight institutions that were visited, with different approaches taken, depending on the country and type of institution in question. At Athens University of Economics and Business in Greece, the changing economic environment has forced the university to think of radical ways to enhance the career prospects of students. This has resulted in a strong emphasis on entrepreneurship, as creating employment is both a major priority of the economy and the best prospect for employment of future graduates. Télécharger la Version complète du rapport "Modernisation of Higher Education in Europe" : .

Modernisation of Higher Education in Europe: Access, Retention and Employability
Date de publication: 22 mai 2014. Version complète: . L'essentiel: . European Press Release.
L'essentiel
Supporting the development of mass higher education systems is high on the policy agendas at both national and European levels. This is because higher education systems in Europe should be designed to quickly respond and adapt to the needs of our increasingly knowledge-based economy and societies. Likewise, to expand the knowledge-base and foster progress, an increasing amount of European citizens are required to hold higher education degrees. In Europe, the EU 2020 strategy, with a goal of 40 % completion by 2020, and the modernisation agenda, for example, both focus on increasing participation in higher education.
In view of these objectives and to support optimal policy making, the Eurydice report on Modernisation of Higher Education in Europe : Access, Retention and Employability examines policy and practice in Europe related to three stages of higher education :
• Access, which includes awareness of the availability of higher education, the requirements to be admitted, and the process of admission ;
• Retention, including progression through the study programme with support that may be provided when problems are encountered ;
• Employability, including measures supporting students' transition from higher education into the labour market.
This brochure summarises key findings of the report.
Only eight countries have set targets to increase participation of specified student groups
The concept of access to higher education no longer only entails the right of eligible students to apply to, and to be considered for, a study programme. It now also encompasses a 'social dimension', which aspires for student bodies to reflect all sections of society. In practice, this means that policies should aim at removing obstacles related to disadvantages such as the social and economic background of applicants. General targets regarding access have been set by nearly all countries. However, there are only eight countries that have defined participation targets for specified student groups. Moreover, the student groups that these countries have identified as targets vary considerably. For example, in the Flemish Community of Belgium, the target refers to children whose parents do not hold a higher education qualification. Finland focuses on increasing male participation while Lithuania would like to increase female participation in maths and sciences.
Monitoring of student characteristics varies significantly between countries and data is not exploited optimally
Although nearly all countries capture basic characteristics of the student population such as age and gender, the range of student characteristics that countries monitor over time varies significantly: 'type and level of qualification achieved prior to entry to higher education' is by far the most frequently monitored aspect, whereas the 'ethnic, cultural or linguistic minority status' of the student population is rarely taken into account.
Higher education institutions rarely receive financial incentives to widen access
Another striking fact that contradicts policy ambitions lies in the lack of financial incentives to higher education institutions to widen access. Only two national governments, Ireland and the United Kingdom, reward higher education institutions that are successful in recruiting, and retaining students from under-represented groups throughout their whole study programme.
26 education systems use financial incentives for students to finish their studies on time
Facilitating access to higher education alone does not guarantee high graduation rates. That's why adequate attention needs to be paid to students actually completing their studies. While precise targets related to improving student retention are not commonly found, individual countries usually set overarching goals to reduce student drop-out and provide specific reward measures to students. 26 education systems, for example, have in place financial incentives that encourage students to complete their studies on time. In these systems, students may for example be asked to pay tuition or administrative fees only if they exceed the regular length of study. Another measure would be to limit financial student support to the regular duration of the studies.
Half of European countries offer financial incentives to institutions that work on increasing completion rates
In addition to financially rewarding individual students, countries can also give financial incentives to higher education institutions that implement measures to retain their students. Interestingly enough, only half of European countries offer such incentives. In the other half, improving completion or reducing drop-out rates has no impact on an institution’s funding.
Part-time studies are often more expensive for individuals than their full-time equivalents
Offering students more flexibility to complete their studies, such as through part-time education or distance learning, can also positively impact on both access and completion rates. Most European countries now offer an opportunity for students to formally organise their studies in a more flexible way compared to traditional full-time, on-site arrangements. Although part-time education should facilitate the lives of those who cannot study full time, such flexibility may come at a cost. In 12 education systems, for example, part-time studies are related, or are likely to be related, to higher private financial investment compared to traditional studies. In addition to higher private fees, the financial support to which they are entitled is also often limited.
17 education systems consult employers to help them match study programmes with labour market needs
National systems and higher education institutions put lots of effort into increasing the employability of their graduates. They can do so by either designing their study programmes in such a way that these respond to labour market needs, or by making sure students will be provided throughout their studies with the right skills to successfully pursue employment. Consulting or involving employers and businesses directly in the design of higher education study programmes is one mechanism for matching study programmes to the labour market. In fact, 17 education systems use this method and involve employers in curriculum development, teaching, and participation in decision-making or consultative bodies.
Quality assurance agencies rarely look at access, retention and employability data in relation to specific student profiles
While higher education quality assurance agencies take some account of access, retention and employability data, they rarely consider different student profiles. For example, agencies may be required to consider admission systems, but do not typically focus on how admissions systems may play a role in access for disadvantaged students. Likewise, quality assurance processes that look at retention may consider trends in completion rates but rarely attempt to understand the underlying causes of dropout. There is also no evidence of any country or quality assurance agency systematically analysing employment opportunities in relation to the social profiles of graduates. It is therefore impossible to know whether factors such as socio-economic disadvantage or ethnicity, which are known to have an impact on access and completion rates, also impact employment after graduation. Télécharger L'essentiel - Modernisation of Higher Education in Europe Access: Retention and Employability.

Modernisation of Higher Education in Europe: Access, Retention and Employability
Date de publication: 22 mai 2014
Version complète:
L'essentiel:
European Press Release.
Description
Le développement de systèmes d'enseignement supérieur de masse de qualité fait partie des priorités de l'agenda politique tant au niveau national qu'européen. Un nombre croissant de citoyens européens doivent disposer de connaissances, d'aptitudes et de compétences de haut niveau pour développer la connaissance et encourager l'innovation et le progrès. Par conséquent, les systèmes d'enseignement supérieur en Europe devraient être conçus pour répondre et s'adapter aux besoins de notre économie et de nos sociétés de plus en plus basées sur la connaissance. Afin de soutenir la prise de décision basée sur la recherche, ce rapport d'Eurydice met en évidence les politiques et les pratiques nationales et institutionnelles actuelles qui visent à accroître et à élargir l'accès, à réduire les abandons et à améliorer l'employabilité des diplômés de l'enseignement supérieur en Europe. Le rapport couvre 36 pays européens ou systèmes éducatifs et consolide les informations qui émanent de trois sources différentes: les unités nationales d'Eurydice, les agences nationales pour l'assurance qualité et quelques visites à des établissements d'enseignement supérieur.

Par Philippe Lemistre, Net.Doc, n° 123, 2014, 24 p. Ce document fournit un état des lieux du déclassement, sur un double registre empirique et théorique. Les chiffres, établis à partir des enquêtes Génération du Céreq, varient en effet selon la norme retenue pour le mesurer. Il propose également une approche originale, qui consiste à considérer le chômage comme une situation de déclassement.
1.2. Déclassement filières et diplômes : des disparités fortes
Les IV sup : pas mieux lotis que les sortants juste après le bac (niveau IV) ?
Pour les IV sup (post bac non diplômés), l’emploi non qualifié n’est pas seulement un emploi d’attente puisque le taux de déclassement institutionnel est de 20% au moins (le déclassement est établi selon le plus haut diplôme donc le bac ici : soit uniquement pour les NQ). En terme de qualification, l’avantage par rapport aux sortants bacheliers de la même génération n’est pas systématique. Ainsi pour les filières industrielles, les sortants au niveau bac sont moins déclassés que les IV sup avec une différence notable 17,4% contre 24,3%. Pour le tertiaire et les filières générales universitaires, l’écart aux bacheliers est favorable, mais très peu élevé et non significatif (de l’ordre de 2%). En revanche, les salaires sont en moyenne plus élevés pour la majorité des IV sup de toutes les filières puisque les déclassements salariaux sont nettement au désavantage des niveaux IV. L’association des normes institutionnelles et salariales donne une indication sur le lien à la qualification des différences de salaires avec un faible recoupement, comme toujours quand sont confrontées les normes. L’avantage au IV sup est alors cette fois toujours avéré mais avec des écarts très faibles sans commune mesure avec les écarts en termes de déclassement salarial. En clair, même pour les emplois non qualifiés les IV sup sont plus fréquemment avantagés en termes de salaire, mais les différences salariales dépassent largement les frontières de la qualification compte tenu d’écarts très conséquents pour le seul déclassement salarial. Deux interprétations sont alors possibles : la première est liée aux nomenclatures pour les ouvriers et plus encore pour les employés ou la frontière de la nonqualification procède souvent davantage de la convention que de la réalité (Rose, 2012). Toutefois, rappelons à nouveau qu’en gardant les conventions habituelles pour les ouvriers et employés qualifiés et non qualifiés, la qualification du premier remploi est particulièrement déterminante de la carrière future. L’avantage des IV plus est donc réel (en terme de salaire immédiat), mais peut-être relatif (en terme de carrière surtout dans l’industrie).
Niveau III (Bac+2) et niveau II (Bac+3 et 4) : une hiérarchie respectée ?
En modifiant la norme institutionnelle des années 80 pour la licence, puisque le déclassement n’intervient que pour les catégories ouvrier et employé (qualifié et non qualifié), les bac+2, Bac+3 et M1 (diplômé niveau II) sont comparables pour ce type de déclassement, mais pas pour les autres. Au bas de la hiérarchie les BTS qui comptent 46,1% d’ouvrier employé (les déclassés donc) pour le tertiaire et 37,9% pour l’industrie.
BTS-DUT Les DUT industriel s’en sortent nettement mieux avec seulement 13,7% de déclassés institutionnels, de même pour le tertiaire ou le taux de déclassés est de 28,5% (contre 46,1%). Les raisons sont pour partie : une offre nettement moins large pour les IUT qui se focalise sur des filières plus favorables, une sélection plus axée sur les plus performants sur le plan scolaire (bac général). Toutefois, ces explications ne suffisent vraisemblablement pas à elles seules à justifier des différences qui se maintiennent en termes de déclassement salarial et même lorsque l’on associe déclassement institutionnel et salarial ou encore pour le déclassement statistique. C’est pour ce niveau que la norme statistique diffère de la norme institutionnelle. Le fort taux de déclassement institutionnel des BTS DUT et aussi des L2 est particulièrement lié à une forte présence de ces diplômés pour le tertiaire dans la catégorie employé qualifié de telle sorte que la norme statistique conclut à l’absence de déclassement pour la correspondance niveau III-EQ. Même en adoptant cette norme le taux de déclassement des BTS et DUT tertiaire sont respectivement de 18,3 et 9,8% soit une forte proportion d’employés non qualifiés (principalement) trois ans après la sortie du système éducatif. Les bac+2 santé social sont peu déclassés, car il s’agit de filières contingentées pour des emplois règlementés, soit où le diplôme de niveau correspondant est requis. On notera tout de même le déclassement salarial de près d’un jeune sur dix (9,3%) dont le salaire n’excède pas le salaire médian des sortants de niveau IV.
Licences et M1
Pour le tertiaire et les filières universitaires, les détenteurs de licence sont moins déclassés (institutionnel) que les niveaux III. La poursuite en licence est donc justifiée. Pour les diplômés de la filière industrielle les écarts sont moins conséquents et même défavorables pour la filière industrielle (déclassement institutionnel DUT 13,7%, licence pro 17,3%). Les gains salariaux des licences sont néanmoins incontestables puisque la norme salariale compare les salaires des niveaux II au salaire médian des niveaux III. Seule une majorité de sortants des licences LSHS (53,5%) gagnent moins que la moitié des détenteurs d’un bac+2.
En termes d’accès à la qualification, on remarque une forte proximité entre les sortants de filières proches pour les licences professionnelles et générales (respectivement déclassement institutionnel Industrie versus Sciences 17,3% et 17,6% ; tertiaire versus LSHS 25,5% et 24,5%). Un tel constat relativise la supériorité réputée de la filière professionnelle (Kergoat et Lemistre, 2014), celle-ci est néanmoins rétablie pour les salaires (respectivement déclassement salarial Industrie versus Sciences 22,1% et 33,4% ; tertiaire versus LSHS 40,2% et 53,3%).
Malgré la mise en place du LMD qui supprime la maîtrise, une année d’étude de plus que la licence permet un déclassement institutionnel nettement moindre y compris au regard des licences professionnelles. Pour les salaires la proximité est plus grande. Toutefois, en 2007 la masterisation est encore en cours notamment pour les filières scientifiques et les IUP qui conservent des diplômes bac+4. Il s’agit donc d’un résultat pour une période qui est encore une transition vers le LMD.
Niveau I
Master S’il n’y a pas de différence notable entre filières recherche et professionnelle, l’accès à la qualification-cadre est fortement différencié entre domaines (Sciences versus LSHS) avec un net avantage aux sciences. Pour autant, quelle que soit la filière, il est important de noter que trois ans après la sortie du système éducatif plus d’un tiers au moins des sortants de Master ne sont pas cadres et au moins deux sur dix perçoivent un salaire inférieur au salaire médian des sortants de niveau II.
Ainsi, pour les filières LSHS le déclassement institutionnel (non cadre) et salarial vont de pair pour au moins deux jeunes sur dix. Écoles de commerce et ingénieurs Pour les écoles de commerces le déclassement est moindre que pour les masters avec toutefois un niveau relativement élevé avec 27,9% non-cadre et 14,5% des sortants ayant un salaire inférieur au salaire médian des niveaux II.
Les sortants d’école d’ingénieur ont une insertion plus favorable, mais là encore le niveau de déclassement institutionnel apparaît relativement élevé (15,1%), contrairement cette fois au déclassement salarial (3,4%).
Docteurs
Quelle que soit la filière les docteurs sont non seulement moins déclassés sur plan institutionnel ou salarial que les sortants de masters, mais aussi que les sortants d’école de commerce. Une seule exception le déclassement salarial de 20,6% des jeunes docteurs de LSHS. Télécharger Net.Doc, n° 123.