A comparative view on policy trends in western european higher education.
| Verfasser | Huisman, Jeroen |
Abstract
This paper gives an overview of the most relevant policy developments (1999-2001) regarding higher education in a number of Western European countries. The focus is on Austria, Denmark, Finland, Flanders, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom. The following issues are addressed. Firstly, which issues are major issues in these countries in this three-year period? Secondly, can we explain why these issues are on the agenda? Thirdly, do the policy developments suggest increasing convergence in policies? We maintain that current policy issues reflect the existence or emergence of five global trends in and around higher education. The ubiquitousness of these trends explains why Western European governments are considering similar policy issues. However, this does not necessarily imply that governments in practice are offering similar policy solutions. It would be more accurate to state that the similar trends challenge governments to find policy solutions most suitable to reach specific national solutions in specific national contexts.
Introduction
It is not a secret that higher education systems across the continent--let alone those further away--have their particular characteristics. Historical legacies (bearing on philosophical traditions, such as those of Von Humboldt, Newman, etc.), but also more recent developments, including governmental policies, have shaped the higher education landscapes. Such contingencies help us to understand, for instance, why research in one country is organised differently from that in another, why professors in some countries have a stronger power position than in other countries, etc.
The logic of the above would challenge us to put forward the expectation that policy trends are path-dependent. That is, each (public) system has its own development and dependent on the problems and challenges a government is confronted with, policies will be developed to steer higher education in the desired direction. Only in the case of global trends, seriously affecting higher education, could one possibly expect that governments develop fairly similar policy solutions to similar problems. The massification of higher education (following the increasing demand for higher education) may be considered as such a global trend. Many Western European governments have introduced similar solutions to the problem of the overcrowding universities and its concomitants: budget problems for governments, a concern for the maintenance of quality, a concern of universities being unable to meet new demands, etc. The solution was to establish a non-university sector, a solution aimed at both meeting the demands and to safeguard the universities. However similar the general policy solutions to massification may seem, the differences should not be downplayed. Not only the pace of change is different: some countries introduced or upgraded non-university sectors in the 1960s (polytechnics in the United Kingdom, Fachhochschulen in Germany, hoger beroepsonderwijs in the Netherlands), others did only recently (Fachhochschulen in Austria, Ammattikorkeakoulo in Finland), whereas still more are considering introducing such sectors. Even more important than when these changes occurred, are the specific details of the changes and their consequences. Throughout the countries that implemented non-university sectors, there are clear differences regarding the degrees to be offered, the size of the non-university sector (both in actual enrolments and the range of disciplines offered), the governmental control on these sectors, etc. (see also Teichler, 1988; Huisman & Kaiser, 2001). Given these differences, it is not surprising that the developments in the countries have different dynamics, leading to different outcomes over time. Systems differ to the extent whether non-university sectors still exist or have disappeared, but they also differ in the role these sectors play in the higher education system.
To summarize, even in the case of global trends, one should be careful in drawing conclusions on similarities in policies. A quick look easily conceals important differences, both in terms of the policy developments as well as their outcomes.
Europeanisation: a converging force?
A critical reader may comment on the final observation in the previous section. Apart from the fact that only one example was mentioned, one could argue that the times have changed. Policy developments regarding massification in the 1970s cannot be compared to those at the turn of the millennium for several reasons. One is that policy makers in higher education are consciously much more aware of trends and developments in other countries. Policy makers have changed from being introspective to being more outward looking. Instead of viewing higher education in relation to secondary education, as part of the national welfare state and as a means to solving national manpower problems, the attention increasingly shifted towards higher education as part of the national economy in a competitive international perspective and towards adjusting higher education to international developments, particularly developments in other higher education systems. The references to international policy experiences in national policy documents, as well as the demand--by policy makers--for comparative research on higher education, may serve as sound indicators of the change to becoming more outward looking. A second reason is that supranational policies were almost non-existent in the 1970s and nowadays much more prominent. National and institutional internationalisation policies and activities have been developed in a dynamic interrelationship with internationalisation policies at the supra-national level (De Wit and Verhoeven, 2001; Van der Wende, 2001). The signing of the Sorbonne and Bologna Declarations and the agreements concerning the European Research Area can be seen as illustrations of such supra-national level developments, although one has to stress that the former example is in fact an intra-national (between nation-states) development and the latter a European Commission (supranational) development.
There are several theories that could help us in putting forward hypotheses on policy trends, policy convergence (e.g. as a result of learning, imitation, coercion, see e.g. Hall, 1993; DiMaggio and Powell, 1983; Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith, 1993, see also Rakic, 2001 for an analysis of convergence in higher education policy). Our aim is, firstly, to describe and analyse which policies are on the agenda in Western European higher education systems. Secondly, we will try to explain why these policies are on the agenda and thirdly, we will speculate about convergence or divergence of policies.
Data and analysis
The methodology applied is as follows. Policy documents and secondary literature...
Um weiterzulesen
FORDERN SIE IHR PROBEABO ANCOPYRIGHT GALE, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
