Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the 'Proposal for a Council recommendation on European cooperation in quality assurance in higher education'
Date: 1997-11-19
Institutions: European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: EU Member State, cooperation policy, education policy, higher education

C 64/76

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

27.2.98

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Proposal for a Council recommendation on
European cooperation in quality assurance in higher education’

(98/C 64/13)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

having regard to the proposal for a Council Recommendation on European Cooperation in
Quality Assurance in Higher Education [COM(97) 159 final 97/0121 (SYN)] presented by the
European Commission;

having regard to the decision taken by the Council on 5 June 1997, under Article 126 and the
first paragraph of Article 198c of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to consult
the Committee of the Regions on the matter;

having regard to its decision on 11 June 1997 to direct Commission 6 for Education and
Training to draw up the relevant opinion;

having regard to the draft Opinion (CdR 285/97 rev.) adopted by Commission 6 on
29 September 1997 (rapporteur: Ms Freehill);

having regard to the Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the European Commission
Green Paper on education-training-research: the obstacles to transnational mobility (1); its
Opinion on education and training in the face of technological, industrial and social challenges:
first thoughts (2); its Opinion on the White Paper on education and training and learning
towards the learning society (3) and its draft Opinion on a proposal amending the Decision
819/95/EC establishing the Community action programme Socrates (4);

having regard to the European Commission Report on the European pilot project for evaluating
quality in higher education,

unanimously adopted the following Opinion at its 20th plenary session on 19 and 20 November
1997 (meeting of 19 November).

1.

Introduction

1.1.
The responses of the Member States to the
Commission Memorandum on higher education (5)
stressed the importance of quality assessment in an
increasingly diversified higher education system. These
responses, coupled with years of cooperation under the
Erasmus programme, encouraged Community action in
the area of quality assessment and quality assurance in
higher education. At its meeting on 21 November 1991,
the Council requested the Commission to undertake the
following steps:

— financing of a comparative study of the evaluation

methods used in the Member States;

— development of a limited number of cooperative

pilot projects in this area;

(1) OJ C 215, 16.7.1997, p. 1.
(2) OJ C 100, 2.4.1996, p. 106.
(3) OJ C 182, 24.6.1996, p. 15.
(4) OJ C 379, 15.12.1997, p. 17.
(5) COM(91) 349 final.

— implementation of mechanisms for strengthening
European cooperation, in the light of experience
already acquired.

1.2.
Following this request and on the basis of the
study by the Commission on the methods of quality
assessment used in the Member States published in Octo-
ber 1993, the Commission launched two European pilot
projects to test a common methodology for quality
evaluation open to national adaptation. These pilot
projects, in which 42 education institutions participated,
were implemented in cooperation with the competent
authorities of the Member States.

There was broad satisfaction with the launch
1.3.
and implementation of these pilot projects and a growing
realization of the need to guarantee the quality of higher
education. The Commission therefore proposed that a
Council Recommendation be presented to introduce
quality evaluation systems based on the results of these
pilot projects.

27.2.98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 64/77

2. General comments

The Commission proposes to Member States that
2.1.
transparent quality assessment and quality assurance
systems be established within their responsibilities for
the operation of their higher education systems. These
quality systems aim to:

— safeguard the quality of higher education within the
particular economic, social and cultural context
of their countries while taking into account the
European dimension and international requirements;

with experts and devising instruments for obtaining
necessary information;

— link quality assurance with other Community activi-
ties under the Socrates and Leonardo programmes
or with the recognition of qualifications at the
European level;

— prepare methods to achieve better integration of

graduates into the European labour market.

— help higher education institutions to use quality
assurance techniques to promote organizational
flexibility and improvement;

2.5.
This network will be eligible for financial support
in the framework of the Socrates and Leonardo Da Vinci
programmes.

— underpin European and world-wide cooperation in

quality assessment.

These systems, it is proposed, will be based on

2.2.
the following principles:

— autonomy and independence of the bodies respon-
sible for quality assessment and quality assurance;

2.6.
It is proposed to present a report every two years
on the development of quality assessment and assurance
systems in the Member States, on cooperation activities
at the European level and to submit proposals to
strengthen these systems.

— relating evaluation procedures to the profile of

institutions;

3. Specific comments

— a combination of internal and external assessments;

— the involvement of all relevant players;

— the publication of evaluation reports.

The systems will also ensure that follow-up
2.3.
actions are taken at the appropriate level, which will
enable higher education institutions to implement their
plans for improving the quality of education and
facilitating the integration of graduates into the labour
market more effectively. It is also proposed that priority
be given by public authorities and the management of
higher education institutions to continuous exchange of
experience and cooperation in quality assessment and
quality assurance with other Member States and inter-
national organizations active in the field of higher
education.

To enable this it is proposed to establish a
2.4.
European Quality Assurance Network with the follow-
ing tasks:

— exchange of information and experience;

— provide technical assistance to individual Member

State authorities in implementing projects;

— provide assistance to groups of institutions from
different Member States to cooperate in quality
assessment or assurance, particularly in the frame-
work of ‘thematic networks’ under the Socrates
programme;

— assist institutions by providing information on new
methodological developments, facilitating contact

3.1. Quality assessment and assurance

3.1.1.
The Committee of the Regions welcomes in
principle the proposal by the European Commission to
support European cooperation in quality assurance in
higher education and the establishment of effective
quality assessment systems in the different higher edu-
cation institutions in the various Member States.

3.1.2.
It points out that the improvement of the
quality of higher education institutions directly concerns
local and regional authorities since these institutions
play an important role in the economic, social and
cultural life of the regions and localities where they are
located. Good quality higher education is, for example,
an important factor in attracting companies to the
region and enabling them to grow.

3.1.3.
The COR must also re-emphasize the impor-
tance of the Community dimension, in maintaining
the commitment of higher education institutions and
relevant organizations in evaluation and in supporting
cooperation and exchange of experiences that are
essential in an evolving European educational environ-
ment.

3.1.4. However, the COR does underline that the
value of quality assessment is in strengthening mutual
trust and should not be imposed, at either the European
or national levels. It must respect cultural diversity,

C 64/78

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

27.2.98

protect existing academic norms and values and guard
against the harmonization of education within Europe.
In this respect, the COR feels that the thrust of the
recommendation is well grounded.

3.1.5.
The COR does stress that the objective of any
evaluation must be to improve the quality of education
and as such the quality of higher education institutions.
Therefore, evaluation of the quality of individual disci-
plines should be combined with the evaluation of
institutional structures and institutional quality assur-
ance systems. This should however not be used to rank
the performance of education institutions but as a tool
by institutions to optimize resources, anticipate future
developments and assist the preparation of strategies
for constant adaptation of institutions in a rapidly
changing environment.

3.1.6.
The Committee of the Regions stresses that a
European system of quality assessment will only be
possible if the Member States provide the appropriate
national frameworks and if Member States are commit-
ted to the development of quality assurance systems and
cooperation at the European level. This presupposes
that account is taken of the fact that the introduction
and organization of internal and external evaluation is
the task of the higher education institutions and the
individual Member States or regions. National frame-
works must allow full autonomy to educational insti-
tutions and allow a synergy to develop between national
policy and the experiences of European quality assess-
ment systems.

3.1.7.
The Committee of the Regions would however
consider that there is a danger in quality assessment
becoming a self-sufficient activity,
in that potential
abuse of the system could occur in relation to the issues
of the promotion of academic prestige and budgetary
allocation. The COR therefore emphasizes that quality
assessment in higher education must not be linked
directly with these issues.

3.1.8.
The COR must also caution against absorbing
an institution’s energies and resources in servicing
systems of evaluation. Quality assessment must not lose
sight of the primary objective of these institutions i.e.
teaching and lead to a preoccupation with measurement
rather than substance. High costs resulting from wide-
ranging administrative activities which bear no relation
to the intended effects should be avoided.

would therefore propose that a set of qualitative criteria
be used as a basis for a quality assessment methodology
to be supplemented by other criteria which would take
into account the individual institutional or national
educational milieu. These qualitative criteria, acting
as a guideline, must be acceptable to educational
institutions and should be drawn from the experiences
of the pilot projects, initiated by the Commission in the
1990s and which were generally well received by the
educational institutions in each Member State. In this
regard, educational establishments will be able to ensure
an effective self-assessment system, with the necessary
support being provided by the competent authorities
within each Member State.

3.2.3.
The results of this methodology would act as
a yardstick for action, as a means of implementing
improvements based on other institution’s experiences,
provide a Community dimension to the quality of
education and as a guide for the mutual recognition of
qualifications.

3.2.4.
The Committee of the Regions agrees that
any quality assessment system must be based on the
autonomy of the education institution and provide for
the institution to apply suitable adaptations to the
methodology used. Education institutions must also
have the capability to initiate appropriate measures in
the light of the results of the assessment and use the
fruits of exchange of experience, which the COR believes
must be a prime element of the methodology, to do so.
The proposed European Quality Assurance Network
with the support of the Member State must facilitate
this.

3.2.5.
The COR also underlines the importance of
involving all relevant actors in the assessment process
and in particular the formal involvement of student
representatives into the decision making process. The
student is a necessary component of quality assessment
and as both the consumer and end product of the services
of higher education institutions is a vital source of
information for improving quality.

3.2. Principles of Quality Assessment

The COR endorses the principles on which
3.2.1.
the proposal
is based and would support the full
implementation of the principles of subsidiarity and
transparency within assessment systems undertaken by
educational institutions.

3.2.2. However, quality assessment calls for a uniform
and universally acceptable methodology. The COR

The involvement of interests outside the edu-
3.2.6.
cation sector, such as local government, industry and
other social partners allows for the broadest concept
of quality — including cooperation between higher
education and local society — to be applied. The
involvement of local and regional authorities ensures
that the specific economic, social and cultural needs of
the locality or region where the institution is located are
effectively taken into account in assessing quality and
that the results of quality evaluation contribute towards
local and regional development. The involvement of

27.2.98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 64/79

employers, practitioners and recent graduates (approxi-
mately 5 years) provides the benefit of their own
experiences, but also their expectations of higher edu-
cation institutions. The COR believes that the inclusion
of these interests must be encouraged and facilitated
not just in the assessment process, but must also be
represented in the European Quality Assurance Network
and the supporting national structures.

3.3. European Quality Assurance Network

3.3.1.
The COR welcomes the establishment of a
European Quality Assurance Network providing it is
not given institutional status. It should act as a necessary
mechanism to continue to promote a quality assessment
culture in European education institutions and to assist
in the coordination of the various assessment systems in
the Member States.

3.3.2. However, the COR considers that the structure
of the network and its legal and financial arrangements
need to be more clearly defined and that its range of
functions should be expanded to include:

— a role in evaluating and combining assessment
methodologies from the various higher education
institutions including the revision of the evaluation
methodologies and the development of a mechanism
of comparative assessment of institutions. This task
should allow for the development of a framework
system applicable to all disciplines in all higher
education institutions and facilitate comparison at
the European level;

— provide direct assistance to higher education insti-
tutions in combining quality assessment systems
with strategic planning measures, the development
of courses, the mutual recognition of academic
qualifications and to reach a common understanding
of what is meant by quality teaching and higher
education. Professional institutes and organizations
already undertake this type of activity, but the
proposed network will provide the European dimen-
sion;

— act as an agency to assist in the exchange of
both academic and management personnel between
institutions, provide training to those involved in
assessment and to promote a culture of team work
in higher education establishments. This will be
particularly important
in the early stages of
developing the system.

3.3.3.
The COR stresses that this network must be
independent and in this regard it would like to see a
clarification of its position or relationship with existing
academic and professional non-governmental networks
already active in quality assessment in higher education
and on the proposed composition of the network.

3.3.4.
The COR would also like a more detailed
outline of the proposed operating structure for the
implementation of the assessments and for the Quality
Assurance Network.

3.3.5.
As part of the network’s role the recommen-
dation proposes that it should prepare methods to
achieve better integration of graduates in the European
labour market. The COR considers that this is an
objective linked to quality assessment. Increased cooper-
ation in quality assessment can enable higher education
institutions to improve their flexibility in responding to
local and regional
labour market demands and in
particular, to the challenges of new organization and
systems of work resulting from the information society
and the globalization of the economy. In this respect, it
refers to its Opinion on the European Commission Green
Paper on Education-training-research: the obstacles to
transnational mobility where it called on the Com-
mission to give emphasis to the development of quality
assurance within its lines of action noting that this was
essential in order to promote transnational mobility
which it considered to be a prerequisite in creating
opportunities in the labour market.

3.3.6.
The recommendation should therefore link the
problems associated with the integration of graduates
into the European labour market outlined in the Green
Paper (1) with quality assessment and suggest a more
clearly defined role for the network.

3.3.7.
The recommendation also proposes that this
European Quality Assurance Network may receive
financial support from the Socrates and Leonardo
in a recent proposal (2) the
programmes. However,
Commission indicated that
the current budget for
Socrates was unable to meet demand effectively. Demand
in 1996, for example, was four times the budget available
and the Commission has proposed a budgetary increase
to cover the current programme period.

The COR is concerned that it will not be
3.3.8.
possible to allocate funding to the network from either
the Socrates or Leonardo programmes, if it has not been
provided for in the proposed increased budget. If this,
as it expects, is the case the COR considers that such a
network and its activities should be incorporated into a
revised Socrates Programme. The COR believes that a
sizeable portion of exchanges of experience should be
funded by and take place within the framework of the
exchanges usually provided for in education pro-
grammes.

3.3.9.
The Committee of the Regions would also like
a more detailed account of the funding requirements of

(1) COM(96) 468 final.
(2) COM(97) 99 final — 97/0103 COD).

C 64/80

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

27.2.98

the European Quality Assurance Network. The COR
considers it appropriate that the network be allocated
specific funding but is concerned that if the financial
needs of the network must be borne by the Member
State that this may discourage the active participation
in the network by certain Member States.

The COR proposes that failing the allocation
3.3.10.
of specific funds for the network, that an existing
European network be used as a basis for the European
Quality Assurance Network. This would help efficiency
and reduce costs.

4. Conclusion

4.1.
The Committee of the Regions underlines that
the value of quality teaches us that you manage what
could go wrong from a position of knowledge, not

supposition, it teaches that people need to be in control
for learning, improvement and innovation to occur.
Quality assessment must therefore emphasize develop-
ment rather than be a process of performance.

4.2.
The COR endorses the Commission’s proposal
as an initiative to further a culture of quality assessment
in European higher education institutions, based on the
broad principles outlined. The COR calls for all relevant
actors, including local and regional authorities, to be
involved in the assessment process in order to ensure
that quality assessment is linked to the objectives of
local and regional development. Before a position is
adopted on the establishment of a European Quality
Assurance Network, there must be a further refinement
of the methodology to be used in the assessments and
clarification on the functions, financing and operating
structures of the proposed European Quality Assurance
Network.

Brussels, 19 November 1997.

The Chairman

of the Committee of the Regions

Pasqual MARAGALL i MIRA