Expert Meeting on the Impact of Globalization on Quality Assurance,
Accreditation and the Recognition of Qualifications in Higher Education
UNESCO, Paris, 10-11 September 2001
ILO perspectives
Bill Ratteree,
ILO, Geneva
The international context
1.
The background document prepared by Prof. van Damme clearly sets out
the changing context and challenges:
-
the regulation of new educational providers outside the traditional public
sector, nationally based higher education institution or system;
the international transferability and recognition of qualifications and
credits, especially in employment terms;
developing an international approach to quality assurance and
accreditation, more of an institutional concern than that of employmentrelated issues, but nevertheless important in an era of increasingly
transnational educational provision.
2.
Within this context I would like to focus on the challenges posed by the
range of employment considerations which will condition mobility of
educational provision in higher education, either through transnational provision
(electronically based virtual, open or corporate universities, public or private
consortia, etc) or mobility of professionals. The examination of European
experiences in this field contained in Mr. Jiri Divis’ paper provides a very good
starting point for discussion by focussing on several key issues:
-
-
advances in the area of “acceptance” of professional qualifications as a
form of recognition of equivalence within or outside national borders;
important work done by UNESCO, CEPES, the Council of Europe and
the European Commission in developing recommendations and codes of
good practice in areas of transparency instruments and international
networks
recognition of what are termed “regulated” professions through
European Union directives;
-
the need for similar initiatives in non-regulated professions;
the emerging challenge of qualifications structures and/or
competencies systems in the framework of increasing diversity of
learning alternatives and lifelong learning.
Extending the focus to other employment issues: the use of international
standards
3.
I want to suggest that an important addition to the regional or international
efforts to address these challenges comes in the form of the UNESCO
Recommendation concerning the Status of Higher-Education Teaching
Personnel, 1997. This instrument has begun to be monitored beginning in 2000
by the Joint ILO/UNESCO Committee of Experts on Teachers.1 It could be a
useful set of good practices in the areas of institutional autonomy, academic
recognition, academic freedom and especially employment conditions which
enhance the context of recognition for labour market decisions.
4.
In the realm of institutional autonomy and accountability for example,
the Recommendation contains provisions on:
-
-
-
international academic co-operation which transcends national,
regional and other barriers and promoting equal partnership of
academic communities around the world (Art 22 (n);
urges the creation of statements or codes of ethics at institutional level in
negotiations with higher education personnel organizations to guide
teaching, research and extension work (Art 22 (k), which could be
important elements of a regulatory framework for transnational quality
control or recognition of competence to work in another country as a basis
for employment recognition;
development of appropriate accountability systems, including quality
assurance mechanisms at institutional level, including the participation of
teachers’ organizations (Art 24, with detailed definitions of criteria in Art.
22), which could assist the search for quality assurance at regional or
international level.
5.
In terms of individual rights and freedoms - civil rights, academic
freedom, publication rights and international exchanges - the Recommendation
contains an important set of guidelines in these fields which underpin the
1
ILO and UNESCO, Report, Seventh Session of the Joint ILO/UNESCO Committee
of Experts on the Application of the Recommendation concerning the Status of Teachers,
Geneva, 11-15 September 2000.
contextual framework of systems as much in the new globalized context as in
more traditional, nationally based systems:
-
-
respect for basic civil or human rights in terms of freedom of thought,
expression, assembly and association (Art 26)(important for individuals
and institutions, and important to evaluate in terms of transnational
educational provision);
academic freedom without discrimination in teaching, research and
professional activities (Art 27-30) as a cornerstone of international
standards (UNESCO, in association with the ILO, is launching a multiyear research project on this subject which could provide important points
for reflection in defining how this principle can be incorporated into
regional or international regulatory frameworks);
6.
In terms of expected duties and responsibilities of higher education
teaching and research personnel as the necessary balance to rights and freedoms,
the Recommendation contains 12 detailed guidelines inherent in academic
freedom (Art 34) which include principles such as:
-
-
respect for ethical standards on teaching, research and dissemination of
information/publications derived from research;
avoid conflicts of interest in full consultation with institutions and
appropriate disclosure (a potentially important consideration in the spread
of national or transnational research and teaching which is supported by
large private financial interests);
avoid misrepresentation of professional expertise to the public (and by
extension students, other members of the academic community), etc.
7.
Areas of the employment relationship, notably entry into the academic
profession and career development, security of employment, appraisal and
discipline & dismissal provide some key pointers on issues underpinning
recognition:
-
-
a just and open system of career development, based on fair procedures
for appointment, tenure, promotion, dismissal, etc (Art 43), which
provides the general principle for national application of nondiscriminatory employment practices among members of a regional bloc
(for instance the increasingly contentious issue of EU nationals, such as
teachers of foreign languages);
security of employment in the form of tenure or its functional
equivalent (Art 45-46), which also may come under increasing scrutiny
or challenge within entities such as the European Union, but which will
-
-
probably emerge in other regional settings, and indeed across borders as
transnational educational provision spreads. The ILO, in association with
UNESCO and other stakeholders, is beginning a complementary research
project on this issue to that on academic freedom;
appraisal systems of higher education staff, still a relatively
underdeveloped and also highly sensitive issue as to criteria and
procedures, but a question at the heart of recognition issues. The
Recommendation (Art 47) lays out some recommended guidelines for
both criteria and procedures which merit consideration in national, and by
extension, transnational settings;
similarly, criteria especially which condition disciplinary and
dismissal actions which may bear on portability of capacity and aptitude
to teach or research in transnational settings.
8.
In the area of salaries, workload and social security benefits (Art 5769), we enter a realm which may or may not have direct implications for
recognition of qualifications and quality assurance, but will surely have indirect
effects on the practical application of mobility (are the standards the same, how
do you compensate for salary differentials, workload requirements and content,
portability of social security benefits). Of special interest are study and
research leave provisions (Art 65-69) which are quite different among
educational systems and institutions but directly impact on qualifications and
competences.
9.
There is another similar domain which we might qualify as a “secondary
generation” of issues, namely those which concern special categories such as
disabled and part-time higher education personnel (the latter a large
component of the overall work force and growing), but which are likely to grow
in importance as transnational provision and mobility of personnel increases,
particularly in the context of national and regional non-discriminatory laws.
Summing up: a proposal for action
10. This review suggests that as a new and still underutilized international
standard, the 1997 Recommendation, complemented by for instance international
labour standards, could play an important contextual, and even direct role in
assisting the establishment of regional or international regulatory frameworks for
recognition and quality assurance in the future. In that respect, UNESCO, along
with the ILO and notably the Joint ILO/UNESCO Committee of Experts could
play a useful role in synthesizing and assuring complementarity in application.