ESIB Response to the
European Commissions Consultation

“The role of the universities
in the Europe of knowledge”

Foreword

ESIB – the National Unions of Students in Europe is the umbrella organization of 50
National Unions of Students from 37 European countries and through these members
represents over 11 million students. ESIB was founded in 1982 to promote the
educational, economic, cultural, social and political interests of students in Europe.

This consultation has been carried out through the democratic structures by the national
student representatives from across Europe. The initial draft was written based on
previous policies and discussions and then this draft was discussed during a plenary
session at the 44th ESIB Board Meeting. The Consultation document was then amended
following the discussion and then circulated to members to discuss the final draft thus
ensuring that this Consultation document is the truly representative document of the views
of the students of Europe.

ESIB welcomes the opening up of the discussion surrounding the role of universities per
se and within the Europe of knowledge more specifically. ESIB appreciates the possibility
of participating in the open consultation process as well as being involved in several of the
working groups under the auspices of the Lisbon Process and look forward to this role
being developed further. Students are the biggest stakeholder in Universities and thus we
feel that we have a lot to contribute to the development process. ESIB feels that the
defining the Role of Universities in the emerging European Higher Education Area and
the Europe of Knowledge should ultimately be the responsibility of society as a whole. In
the process of defining the role of universities all stakeholders within the Higher
Education community, including students, must be equally represented.

ESIB acknowledges the need to discuss higher education from a financial and economical
perspective, when it comes to funding of higher education, however ESIB would like to
stress that the increased use of economical discourse, that is very much used now in higher
education, considerably neglects the role of higher education as a public good and public
responsibility. ESIB does not agree with the comment on page 13 of the Communication
that “there is a limited margin of manoeuvre for increasing public support”, if a Europe of
Knowledge is to become a reality it is essential that there is increased public funding to
meet this goal, rather than purely relying on private sources to meet this public policy
objective.

ESIB strongly believes that higher education is and must remain public good, thus we
stress that the role of higher education and the role of higher education institutions, is to
develop individuals not only to fit into the labour market, but also to develop critical
thought as well as their personal, social and cultural development. When developing the
European Higher Education Area it is important that the social dimension, particularly in
relation to access to Higher Education, is fully taken into consideration, we would not
want to see a situation such as the United States where there is an excellent higher
education system that is only accessible to the lucky few. Higher Educations gives
individuals the possibility to develop their talents, so Higher Education ensures that there
is no waste of talent, which is important for society as a whole. Higher education also
plays a key role in the development societies as a whole, not only economically, but also
democratically and socially. Acknowledging this important role of Higher Education, a
country should take its responsibility and strongly invest in Higher Education We feel that
this dimension of higher education has been neglected both in the consultation document
and in the academic communities both on the national as well as European level.

ESIB reaffirms it’s position that education is and must stay the responsibility of the
national governments. Further, ESIB believes that development of European Higher
Education Area and policies concerning Higher Education lies in co-operation between
universities, rather than competition. In an increasingly internationalized and globalized
higher education ESIB sees co-operation between institutions, countries or regions as the
only path that would secure equal treatment and development in all regions both in Europe
and the world. It should also be recognized that whilst comparisons with the US and other
higher education systems are valid and there are some lessons to be learnt ESIB would
stress the necessity of developing a European approach to higher education building on
the historic tradition of university education within Europe over the past millennium.

Funding for the future – Higher Education into the next century

5.1.1 Increasing and diversifying universities’ income

When talking about increasing and diversifying the income of universities there is a
number of initiatives that can be taken, however, it should be emphasised that public
funding is and should remain as the primary source of funding representing the role of
higher education as a “public good” as defined in the Prague Communiqué of Ministers of
Education in May, 2001.

One way of income generation that is often discussed is through greater public donations,
either in the form of individuals, usually primarily alumni of the institutions, or from the
collective often in the form of contributions from business. This form of donations should
be encouraged by beneficial tax breaks, maybe even including universities in the same tax
bracket as charities as is currently done in the UK, and universities should be encouraged
to look for this to a much greater extent, however there are some concerns as outlined
below.

Universities can also exploit the intellectual property to a much greater extent, both in
terms of patents and also through setting up companies that can take advantage of the
research. These companies would need to be established separately in order to ensure that
the public nature of universities is not threatened. It is, of course, of key importance that
this does not interfere with the academic core of the institution and that resources are not
taken away from teaching in order to chase mythical financial pots of gold

When talking about contributions from students there are usually two main options, upfront
tuition fees or some form of fee after graduation, such as a a graduation tax, we shall
refer to this as the graduate premium below.

paying for education – a public service funded through taxation

ESIB members believe that students should not pay for their education through tuition
fees, either paid up front or after graduation. Neither do they accept the principle of a
specific graduate tax, either finite or infinite.

ESIB members also believe that means-testing is regressive, as it

• stigmatises poverty;
• does not acknowledge students’ independence at 18;
• excludes students who are estranged from their families, such as many lesbian, gay and
bisexual students;
• negates the role of education as a public service, which should be funded through public
taxation.

ESIB members believe that students contribute to funding HE both during study and after
graduating through personal and business taxation. These tax contributions should be
redistributed back into education.

ESIB members have pointed to the fact that, for example in the UK since 1979,
corporation tax has been cut by 23% and top rate income tax by 43%. Returning to
increased levels of taxation would help to pay for a properly funded further and higher
education system. The arguments for this are given below.

Students’ contributions to education funding

Students are increasingly paying for the HE funding gap through hidden costs such as

• increasing accommodation costs;
• hidden course costs;
• making up the shortfall in student support through paid work;
• making up for the withdrawal of social security benefits as low income citizens.

ESIB has highlighted how students are required to subsidise their student support through
increased paid work and will discuss the withdrawal of social security benefits. In addition
to this, ESIB members believe that students pay for HE through personal and corporate
taxation as graduates. This is their fair contribution to funding both further and higher
education. It is up to the government to ensure that this funding is diverted into education
as a priority.

Tuition fees

Tuition fees paid up-front for full-time undergraduates, are a deterrent to access. Evidence
from America and Australia supports this

• a 1995 report by the American Association of State Colleges and Universities claimed
that 1 in 3 of all new HE students had based their choice of institution on tuition fee levels
and/or financial aid offers, not on their grades;
• Australia’s Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs (DETYA) has reported
a marked deterioration in access rates over the period since Higher Education Contribution
Scheme (HECS) had been fully introduced (1991-97) for students from low income, rural
and isolated backgrounds.

ESIB members are also concerned that enabling institutions to charge different fees will
divide the HE sector into elite institutions that charge more while other institutions are
forced to charge less in order to fit in as many students as possible to boost their public
funding. There is a proven link between those with no family traditional of going to
university not being prepared to bear the huge financial loans to benefit in the long run
and ESIB would be concerned about any measures that limited access to education. Again,
this will force prospective students to choose their degree on what they can afford, rather
than where they want to study. It may also create huge dilemmas for families saving for
their children to go to university. In America, where price is a crucial factor in choosing
HE courses, the assumption is that cheaper equals lower standard. American families are
having to save for higher cost institutions as a proxy for quality and rate of return. This
goes against principles of equal access and leads to a divisive system.

The graduate premium

It is often argued that students should contribute more towards the costs of higher
education because of the extra 600,000 euros on average they will earn by virtue of having
a degree. However, ESIB believes that promoting ‘average’ benefits is unhelpful for
potential students. The increasing diversification of the student population means that it is
important that individuals are aware of what HE could mean for them in particular; for
example, the benefits to an 18 year old single white middle class male, may not be the
same as those for a 30 year old black working class woman. It is also important that
prospective students are aware of the differences in benefits brought to bear by personal
factors, course choice, development of employability and career choices. ESIB believes
that promoting an average 600,000 euros graduate premium is misleading for a number of
reasons indicated below:

cost of lost opportunity
Graduates spend from two years upwards not earning when non-graduates are in work,
and thereby losing out on earnings during this time.

increased indebtedness
It is highly likely that those who have graduated under the current systems of student
tuition fees may accumulate greater levels of debt than their non-graduate peers. How this
affects lifetime financial stability and economic behaviour is yet to be seen. Student loan
debt is still debt to commercial financial institutions. For example, in the UK the Council
of Mortgage Lenders have speculated that they expect to see the average age for taking on
a first mortgage (currently 34) to rise as a result of increased graduate debt. Graduate debt
may also affect or delay an individual’ s ability to plan for their pension and investment
needs in comparison to non-graduates. Therefore, what may at first appear to be financial
gain from a graduate premium has to be balanced against the consequences of increased
long-term indebtedness.

differential rates of return
Research demonstrates that not all graduates benefit from HE equally and this is a view
supported by the Dearing Inquiry (UK, 1997). A number of factors determine a graduate’ s
earning potential: entry qualifications, social class, level of HE qualification, degree
subject and degree outcome may affect the probability of unemployment after graduation,
further study and employment in a graduate level occupation. For example, the National
Audit Office (NAO) found that in England, three years after graduating, people from
social class V earn on average 7 per cent less than those from social class I. Although the
average graduate salary is currently £17,687, rising to £24,734 in 2 years, the range can
vary enormously, depending on sector and region. For example, the Association of
Graduate Recruiters’ (AGR) figures show that the highest graduate entry salaries are in
investment banking or fund management (£35,000), with the lowest graduate salaries
being offered by transport and logistics (£16,5000). AGR have also found that median
salaries are highest in London (although this is the only area not experiencing a rise in
graduate salaries in 2002), and lowest in Scotland, the Midlands and Yorkshire.
The premium also neglects the reduced earning potential of more mature graduates or
those who are likely to take career breaks, such as women and carers.

graduate premium is paid back to government
If we accept that the ‘average graduate’ does manage to earn 600,000 euros more, this is
likely to be diminished to 350,000 euros after income tax, and further reduced by
payments to government and commercial debts accumulated as a student.

the impact of increasing participation on the graduate premium
Finally, there is no strong evidence to suggest that the prospect of earning 600,000 euros
or more over one’ s lifetime will not diminish significantly as graduate numbers rise.
ESIB calls for clearer and more specifically targeted information about rates of
return for different potential students on specific institutional and course choices.
This is essential if potential students are to assess the investment they are making in
HE and make informed choices about their education and skill development.

Employers’ Contributions to HE Funding

Employers benefit from HE teaching in a number of ways

• HE creates a pool of appropriately skilled graduates. The Association of Graduate
Recruiters’ (AGR) survey has shown that employers are willing to pay a premium for
graduates; even higher if the graduate has work experience, a second degree or has
achieved a first class honours;
• employers benefit through HE providing a mutual testing ground through work
experience, i.e. students can ensure they are choosing an appropriate career path, but
employers can test recruitment and training techniques and gauge whether courses are
delivering the calibre of graduates needed for their business;
• research has shown that work experience students provide an important financial input
into businesses. 86% of companies involved in an eight-week student placement scheme
said that students had made an immediate business impact. 72% quantified the financial
gain as averaging some 7,500 euros from a placement that had cost them 1,700 euros, with
6% quantifying the gain as above 30,000 euros. Many businesses also benefit from having
a local pool of skilled cheap labour for casual and part-time work. The recent UUK
Student Debt Project shows that full-time undergraduate students are undertaking more
hours of paid work than in previous surveys to supplement the inadequate level of income
provided through government student support. NUS UK Students at Work survey showed
that students are most likely to be working in the retail and service sectors, often involving
unsociable hours with little trade union protection in the workplace. Thus these students
are bolstering the local economy through providing a continuous source of cheap labour
for such businesses;
• employers also benefit from ‘cheaply priced’ research and development services. As the
Council for Industry in Higher Education (CIHE) has pointed out, whilst industry
collaboration with HE via research is increasing, and the income from research charities in
science and engineering is around £600 million, neither industry, charities nor the public
sector are meeting the full costs of institutional overheads.

So, it is clear that employers should contribute more to HE. Increasing and reinvesting
corporation tax is particularly crucial for ensuring a fairly funded access orientated student
support system.

ESIB members do not accept that additional student or graduate contributions are justified
through tuition fees nor accept the debt burden as an ‘investment’ for future earning
potential.

However, ESIB is keen to stress that business involvement in HE teaching and research
should not compromise academic freedom. For example, where businesses are involved in
developing in developing curriculum, although institutions should be sensitive to
employers’ local needs (as is being encouraged through foundation degrees), there should
be consistent minimum standards for course content must be maintained. This will help
employers to understand the qualification obtained by the graduate and reassure the
student that quality is being upheld.

ESIB would also like to stress that due to the volatile nature of market economies and
businesses’ interests, funding through business cannot be relied upon as a consistent
source of funding and can be fickle as to where it falls. There is a danger that if businesses
strike up relationships with specific institutions (often for specific periods of time), other
institutions and their students suffer through lack of investment or sudden withdrawal of
investment.

ESIB would recommend having safeguards to ensure more equitable distribution of
business funding across institutions.

ESIB calls for:

• an increased percentage of salary paid in taxation by those in the higher tax
brackets;
• increased corporation taxation;
• revenues from both to be ploughed back into further and higher education to fund
a genuinely access-based student support system.

Alumni Contributions

ESIB supports initiatives to facilitate graduates to make contributions to their institutions
through Gift Aid and voluntary tax contributions. However, it should not be assumed that
significant alumni contributions are possible across all institutions and this income will be
used to develop scholarships for access to institutions charging high tuition fees.
ESIB has a number of concerns about reliance on such methods to bolster scholarships for
access policies.

Evidence-based policy

There is no evidence to support assumptions that significant revenue can be build up by
institutions. In fact in the UK at institutions where alumni currently do contribute, such as
the University of Warwick, the institution is often not able to offer scholarships to the
broad base of students in need. There is no evidence to suggest that alumni contributions
are a beneficial way of generating revenue for all institutions. In fact, it is likely that only
a handful of institutions will be able to benefit from this route of fundraising, as
administration may prove to be more costly than the revenue gained.

The US experience – tuition fees still spiral with alumni contributions

American institutions lead the way in attracting contributions from alumni. However,
despite some institutions benefiting from this system, tuition fees have still had to rise
substantially to meet the need for grants to attract under-represented groups. For example,
during the 2001/2 academic year, tuition fees at public US institutions rose an average 6%
(to an equivalent of approximately 2,380 GBP) compared to 2000/1, and in private
institutions, where alumni contributions are the highest, the fees were still as high as
19,300 GBP. With spiralling tuition fees, student indebtedness in the US has doubled
since the mid-1990’ s. For example, the total amount of Stafford loans borrowed by
students increased from about $15 billion in 1992/3 to about $35 billion in 1999/2000.
Balancing graduate contributions with alumni contributions

If a back-end graduate contribution to tuition fees is enforced through government, alumni
will already be contributing to the costs of funding the HE system. Additional
contributions from alumni to their institutions directly is a tall order and unlikely where
significant graduate debt needs to be paid off.

ESIB views alumni contributions as an additional source of funding that institutions
could use to support additional teaching and research scholarships for underrepresented
students, not as a replacement for government investment in the sector.

Democratizing Higher Education

5.1.2 Using the available financial resources more effectively

Democratic access whilst preventing drop-outs

Higher education should be accessible to all and the aim should be to increase the
percentage of all sections within society going to higher education specifically targeting
those that are currently excluded, such as students with disabilities and students from
lower socio-economic backgrounds. It should, however, be accepted, that simply by
allowing a greater diversity of students into higher education will not automatically result
in it becoming more accessible and democratic. Universities have developed over many
centuries to meet the needs of a certain section within society, namely the children of the
elite and a few intellectual children from lower socio-economic groups, and simply
allowing more students from a disadvantaged background without developing structures to
meet the needs of the changing student population will simply result in increasing dropout
rates. The issue of drop-out rates is also intrinsically linked to the issue of quality
within higher education, a student will be less likely to voluntarily drop-out of the course
if they can see the high quality of it. This quality dimension must include students in both
the feedback and evaluation processes to ensure that their views are adequately considered
and their views integrated into future curricula development.

As the demographic make-up of the University population develops so should the support
mechanisms made available to students to help tackle the issue of escalating drop-out
rates. There should be student hardship grants or loans made available for cases of
extreme student financial hardship and there should be support mechanisms such as
counselling services, financial advisors, and greater academic support. The specific needs
of students such as the students with disabilities and students with families have to be met.
The student support system in universities should be aiming to adequately support
students and reduce the number of drop-outs, whilst recognising that in some cases
dropping-out is the best option for the student involved. There needs to less stigma
attached to dropping-out as it can be the most suitable option for the individual involved,
and even the phrase “dropping out” has negative connotations and should be changed.

Universities meeting supply and demand of the market

Universities have a role in ensuring that their courses prepare students for the labour
market to an extent and that students graduate with transferable skills that are useful to
graduate employers. This transference of key skills is not the primary role of University,
clearly this is and should be academic, but it should be recognised that University plays a
unique role in developing the individual and that when the student graduates they will
look for a job in some way, shape or form.

It is important, however, that whilst Universities should help facilitate the development of
key skills integrated within the course that the course should not lose its academic value
and rigorousness.

However, it is often forgotten that role of universities isn’ t only to answer the demand of
the market. Universities play one of the most important roles in developing individuals
into the responsible citizens able to contribute to society, not only through labour market,
but also through their role in promoting cultural and social innovation.

Equal duration of courses of identical qualifications

This issue is addressed within the Bologna Process that the same qualification should be
broadly the same duration. It is important that there is some flexibility in the length of the
course to enable different institutions to emphasise different aspects and teach the course
in different ways but they should broadly be under the same framework By ensuring that
courses are of a similar length it will enable much greater transparency of qualifications
and enable the recognition of these qualifications between countries and institutions. It
will also prevent some countries trying to gain a “competitive” advantage by decreasing
the length of a given qualification, which also result in a decrease in the academic content.

Increasing the transparency of research costs

Whilst it is important that public funds within higher education are used efficiently and
that there is transparency in the way that research funds are spent, it is important to stress
that this must not simply lead to institutions prizing the most efficient use of resources and
hence concentrating on applied research rather than the much more theoretical but equally
valuable pure research. It is important to stress that basic research should be funded as
much as the applied research.

Researching the commercial opportunities

5.1.3 Applying scientific research results more effectively

Universities creating companies

Universities should be encouraged to benefit from the intellectual property that is being
developed at their institution. This should include investigating the patenting opportunities
to a much higher extent and even creating their own company to develop their inventions.
It must however be clear when employing researchers what recognition and remuneration
both parties get in the research that is carried out, thus ensuring that neither the individual
or the institution are left feeling exploited. Universities can also benefit by creating
science and research parks near their institutions where research is carried out and an
atmosphere of invention and innovation is created.

Universities utilising research

When institutions carry out research they should be able to benefit from the investment
that they place both in the individuals and facilities. However, it should be clear that
whilst encouraging this it should not develop in such a way that only those researchers
that are doing applied or commercially viable research are able to work, universities were
created as a venue for new and original thought to develop and this pure research should
be given its key place within the community.

Centres of Excellence

5.2.2 Developing European centres and networks of excellence

ESIB does believe that all higher education institutions should strive to realize their
potential to the best of their capabilities and in this sense ESIB supports the achievement
of excellence in higher education institutions. But, excellence very heavily implies elitism,
which ESIB is strongly against. ESIB does not in any way support a possible perspective
of having a limited number of institutions recognized as ‘excellent’ receiving significant
amount of financial resources and top human resources at the expense of other institutions.

Concentration of Research funding

ESIB believes that concentrating research funding will have numerous negative effects,
namely:

• the loss of many talented members of staff: if resources are localised to specific sites,
then academic staff will be forced to choose between teaching and research. Given that the
rewards and esteem for research are far higher, ESIB would expect valued and talented
teaching staff to opt for the research avenue, with the gradual erosion of dynamism and
creativity within the teaching environment;
• the loss of research opportunities (and postgraduate research opportunities in
departments that have an excellent record in supporting postgraduate research);
• increase in the student/staff ratios; and result in
• a deterioration in the quality of the student experience.

The teaching-research link

ESIB believes that the link between research and teaching is a crucial one, to ensure that
creative and innovative ways of thinking and doing are transmitted to those – including
students – who quite rightly understand that as part of Higher Education. Students need
up-to-date, first-hand experience from staff, who have been interacting within the research
arena at local, regional, national and international levels. Of course, HEIs have differing
missions and may well have certain areas of competence, but this does not normally
exclude one of the principal functions that has through a shared history and understanding
come to mean higher education.

ESIB members call for:

• universal research funding to be available where actual or potential research
performance is shown, so that all universities are eligible to apply for and expect
some degree of research funding;
• support for those research units that provide good peer support to research
students;
• private research funding to be seen first and foremost as an additional source of
funding, not a primary one;
• a protection system to be set in place for institutional private research funding to
safeguard academic freedom; act as a safeguard against bias in academic endeavour
and ensure that costs were not passed onto the student;

5.2.3 Excellence in human resources

ESIB strongly believes in development of individuals through higher education, and in
this sense we do feel that achieving excellence in ones own personal development is of
utmost importance and is closely linked to the quality of the curricula and HEIs as such.
However ESIB is very concerned by the use of “excellence discourse” in the context of
higher education and especially when it is used in the connection with human resources.
ESIB feels that this can, to a certain extent, imply the creation of the new elites in higher
education based on very high admission criteria.

ESIB stresses the importance of acknowledging the need for increasing the number of
researchers and importance of research in human and social studies. Human and social
sciences play a significant role in developing societies and their role in creation of Europe
of knowledge must not be underestimated. The development of a Europe of knowledge
must not depend solely on developing the technical and math sciences. ESIB calls for all
stakeholders to recognize the importance of equal treatment of human and social sciences
and the necessity to develop them at the same pace with the technical and math sciences.

Women in research

ESIB strongly supports the equal treatment of women in all spheres of society and
academic structures. ESIB would like to point out that the choice of area and subject of
study is a choice of individual and the individual has to have an equal opportunity to enter
the HEIs and study the course that they choose to.

While ESIB acknowledges that there is a significant difference in numbers in women and
men involved in science and research ESIB does not feel that this can efficiently be solved
by introducing the gender quotas. To involve more women in the research and scientific
areas of higher education steps such as: efficient system of counselling and advisory for
high school graduates, as well as information on the different possibilities of studies.
Furthermore there should be the same services offered during the studies so that students
have enough information and possibility to discuss their future paths in studying including
research and science if they wish to do so.

Further, ESIB does not see that the increase of women in science and research would
increase the number of researchers and scientists in general if the increase of women
would, through introduction of quotas, decrease a number of men in these areas.
Increasing number of students in research and science

To increase the number of researchers and scientists in Europe a number of issues have to
be taken into the consideration:

· The students going into research have to have adequate facilities to study and work
· They have to be involved in research projects or be able to start them on their own
· There is also a need to be an adequate system of mentoring

To adequately fulfil these requirements further resources both in funding and human
resources are needed.

Mobility

ESIB welcomes the initiative to remove legislative obstacles to mobility of researchers
such as introduction of research visas and residence permits, ESIB finds it very important
to undertake such initiatives for students as well.

Further ESIB believes that mobility enriches not only the individual students but the
institutions as well in both the academic and cultural sense. To enable genuine mobility in
Europe a number of issues have to be addressed.

While not undermining the importance of the cultural experience gained during the study
period abroad ESIB stresses the academic value gained as the first and foremost reason of
taking a set of courses or a whole academic period abroad. To achieve this goal obstacles
in recognition have to be overcome. ESIB calls up on governments to ratify the Lisbon
Recognition Convention as a tool in removing the barriers to recognition.

Development of ICT and its use in higher education

However ESIB sees the social barriers as the biggest obstacle towards achieving genuine
mobility. One of the core reasons for low mobility rates is the insufficient funding for
students and this needs to be seriously addressed. ESIB sees substantial obstacles to
mobility on one hand in the influence of economic and educational background of a
student and on the other hand in excessive and unnecessary administrative rules. Thus
ESIB urgently calls upon the signatory states and parties of the Bologna Process to discuss
and implement a European mobility fund or mobility system. ESIB reiterates the need to
guarantee equal access for foreign students to all social services offered to domestic
students.

With the development of new information and communication technologies, new terms
such as e-learning and e-mobility have started to be used in HE community. Even though
international experience can to a certain extend be created virtually, real (physical)
contacts cannot be replaced by virtual interaction. Physical mobility as such is an
irreplaceable value. Although ESIB does see different ways in which students can be
mobile, it does not consider e-mobility to be mobility. The very definition of mobility
implies movement of person from one place to another, thus e-mobility does not exist.
While e-learning brings many promises, there are a number of issues that remain to be
addressed before e-learning can be a useful addition to traditionally delivered courses.
Pedagogical innovation and acquisition of useful skills need to be stressed in e-learning
courses. Problems related to access and recognition need to be solved urgently.

Democratic models for student participation and representation need to be developed and
implemented in all e-learning.

Finally, ESIB stresses the need to address issues related to e-learning as a part of a wider
higher education policy framework, keeping in mind the general pedagogical, social and
cultural aims of higher education in building up democratic societies.

5.3. Broadening the perspective of European Universities

5.3.1. A broader international perspective

Government regulations

ESIB welcomes the initiatives taken by the Commission and several Member States in
removing a part of obstacles to mobility of students and researches through, for example,
issuing of “scientific visas”. ESIB calls up on all the governments in Europe to undertake
measures in order to reduce obstacles such as visa and residence permits for researchers
and students, restrictions on the right and possibility to work in order to guarantee fair and
equal treatment of mobile students compared to domestic students. Further ESIB calls up
on the higher education institutions to address the inadequate admission policies for the
foreign students which significantly hinder the equality of treatment.

Mobility vs. Brain drain

The presence of foreign teachers, students and researchers supports the international
atmosphere of higher education institutions in a natural way and gives students
possibilities to learn to act in a multicultural environment. Also the academic and cultural
experience gained through a study period abroad significantly contributes to both
professional and personal development of a student, teacher or a researcher. While ESIB
strongly supports mobility both within Europe and in the world, ESIB is very concerned
with the increasing brain drain in the third world and south eastern European countries.

The large migration of experts from the East to the West of Europe and from the third
world countries to developed countries diminishes the possibility of innovation and stands
in the way of East, Central, South-East Europe (ECSE) and third countries towards future
prosperity. The development of the ECSE and third world countries depends on the highly
educated people able to contribute to the development of democracy, economy and society
as such. ESIB feels that awareness about the brain drain both in the national and HEIs
structures is still very low and it has to be raised, further ESIB believes that countries
gaining highly educated persons from the less developed countries have to contribute to
the development of these countries.

Attractiveness of European higher education institutions

To increase the attractiveness of HEIs an effective recognition within the mobility
framework has to be found. ESIB call up on all governments in Europe to sign and ratify
the Lisbon Recognition Convention. Many useful tools such as Diploma Supplement and
ECTS within the Bologna process have been suggested. ESIB strongly supports proper
implementation of the above mentioned tools within the Bologna framework that would in
ESIBs opinion facilitate mobility. The issue of recognition between the third world and
non – signatory Bologna countries with EU also has to be found. There is a significant
lack of flexibility in the HEIs that negatively affects recognition even within the
institution itself. HEIs should take upon themselves structural changes where they are
needed to address this problem. It is needed to stress that decision of taking such reforms
is upon HEIs which in their decision making process have to include all stakeholders
within the academic community including students.

ESIB once more reaffirms it’s position that the prerequisite for development in the
international environment surrounding the higher education is co-operation rather
than competition.

5.3.2. Local and regional development

Value of universities to local and regional communities

Although there is a need to develop the curricula and the structure of HEIs in a way that
they can answer the needs of the emerging international environment, HEIs are very
connected to the national economies and societies and their labour market. The HEIs have
and should continue answer the specific needs of the society where they are situated.
To address the specific needs of the societies and labour market of the region or local
community universities should develop courses and curricula specifically designed for
these purposes. There will always be students who will want to work on the development
of their local or regional communities, these students need courses and curricula created to
meet their needs. Thus the value of such courses and curriculas should not be underestimated,
they are in ESIB views equally important to development of courses that are
widely applicable.

Regional dimension

A number of regions within Europe have a significant number of similarities in their
higher education systems and the needs and challenges they face. It is up to the higher
education institutions and academic communities to see from which possible joint cooperation
they would benefit the most, whether it’ s through joint projects, creations of
networks or possible joint courses.

Regional dimension in European research, education and training projects and programmes

Higher education institutions play a key role in the local and regional community, ranging
from employing large numbers of staff and attracting students to the region to encouraging
businesses to move to university towns to take advantage of the research opportunities and
skilled labour market of graduates. Higher education institutions should develop more the
links with the local region and vice versa the regional authorities should look to support
the institutions. There is often a “town and gown” divide in university towns with the local
community resenting the university without recognising the key role that the institution
plays in development of the economy and society more generally.

Conclusions

ESIB would like to stress in conclusion a number of points:

• that higher education is a public responsibility and should be funded primarily through public finances
• additional sources of income generation should be investigated and facilitated by government support, whether including alumni contributions or greater contributions from the business community
• equal access to higher education has to be preserved
• there should be greater links with local community to ensure the development of the local community as a whole
• research should not be dictated by financial concerns but on its academic merit
• HEIs play a central role in developing knowledge based economy, but they playeven a greater role in developing individuals and society as a whole
• the role of universities as a place for development of critical thought, culture, language diversity, etc. should not be underestimated
• long term perspective of universities development must not be driven by short term demands of market
• human and social science has to be treated equally to math and technology science since their contribute equally to overall development of society