98/561/EC: Council Recommendation of 24 September 1998 on European cooperation in quality assurance in higher education
Date: 1998-09-24
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU Member State, cooperation policy, education policy, higher education

L 270/56

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

7. 10. 98

COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION

of 24 September 1998

on European cooperation in quality assurance in higher education

(98/561/EC)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community, and in particular Articles 126 and 127
thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,

Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social
Committee (1),

Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the
Regions (2),

Acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in
Article 189c of the Treaty (3),

(1) Whereas a high quality of education and training is
an objective for all Member States; whereas the
Community is called on to contribute to their
ongoing efforts by promoting cooperation between
Member States and, if necessary, by supporting and
supplementing their action while fully respecting
their responsibility for the content of teaching and
the organisation of education and training systems
and their cultural and linguistic diversity;

(2) Whereas

the Council stated that

in its conclusions of 25 November
1991 (4)
improving the
quality of higher education was a concern shared
by each Member State and by every institution of
higher education within the European Community;
whereas, in view of the diversity of methods used at
national
could be
complemented by European experience acquired,
in particular, through pilot projects aimed at estab-
lishing cooperation in this area or at strengthening
existing cooperation;

level, national

experience

(3) Whereas the replies to the Commission memor-
andum on higher education stress inter alia that
quality should be guaranteed at all levels and in all
sectors, with differences between institutions only
in terms of objectives, methods and educational
demand; whereas there is general support for the

(1) OJ C 19, 21. 1. 1998, p. 39.
(2) OJ C 64, 27. 2. 1998, p. 63.
(3) Opinion of the European Parliament of 18 November 1997
(OJ C 371, 8. 12. 1997, p. 33), Council common position of
26 February 1998 (not yet published in the Official Journal)
and Decision of
the European Parliament of 28 May 1998
(not yet published in the Official Journal).

(4) OJ C 321, 12. 12. 1991, p. 2.

introduction of efficient and acceptable methods of
quality assurance which take into account Euro-
pean and international experience and the poss-
ibility of cooperation;

(4) Whereas a Commission study on the state of
quality assurance in the Member States revealed
that the new quality assurance systems had certain
points in common; whereas the two pilot projects
conducted subsequently were based on these core
elements of existing national systems; whereas they
tested a common method successfully and showed
that the players in the field are all eager to pursue
exchanges of experience which demonstrate the
diversity of national evaluation cultures as well as
the importance of quality assurance in general;

(5) Whereas, in view of the great diversity of education
systems in the Community, the definition of the
term ‘higher education institution' to which the
recommendation refers includes all the types of
institutions which confer qualifications or degrees
at this level irrespective of how they are described
in the Member States; whereas this definition is
used in the decision establishing the Socrates
programme;

(6) Whereas higher education institutions have to meet
the new educational and social requirements of a
world-wide ‘knowledge society' and the resulting
developments; whereas
therefore,
endeavour to improve the required attributes of the
services they provide by developing, where appro-
priate, new initiatives (individually or on a collabor-
ative basis within higher education associations),
aimed at increasing the quality of teaching and
learning;

they will,

(7) Whereas the technological and economic changes
and their consequences for the labour market pose
new challenges for higher education institutions
and whereas, in view of the challenges of global
competition as well as the ever increasing influx of
institutions,
students
Member States face the task of organising their
higher education systems and their relationships
in ways which
vis-(cid:133)-vis

education

society

higher

State

into

and

7. 10. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 270/57

respect existing academic standards, training objec-
tives, quality standards, the autonomy and/or the
independence — in terms of the relevant structures
in each Member State — of higher education insti-
tutions, and the need to be accountable to and
inform the public;

(8) Whereas discussion of the Commission commun-
ication of 13 February 1994 has demonstrated that
quality assurance systems could contribute towards
mutual recognition of academic or professional
qualifications at Community level;

(9) Whereas the Commission White Paper on ‘Growth,
the White
Competitiveness and Employment',
Paper on ‘Teaching and Learning:
towards the
Learning Society' and the Green Paper on ‘Educa-
tion — Training — Research. The obstacles to
indicate how important
transnational mobility'
high-quality education is
for employment and
growth within the Community and for its compet-
itiveness at world level; whereas these documents
highlight the link that exists between the social
and cultural functions of education and training, on
the one hand, and their economic functions, on the
other hand, and therefore the many aspects of the
concept of quality; whereas it is clear that trans-
parent educational systems are required for transna-
tional mobility;

(10) Whereas encouraging mobility is one of the aims
of Community cooperation in the fields of educa-
tion and training; whereas the Commission Green
Paper on ‘Education — Training — Research. The
obstacles to transnational mobility' examines the
principal
practical
administrative
obstacles encountered by students wishing to study
in another Member State, proposes measures to
improve mobility and stresses that
this type of
to an education of high
mobility is beneficial
quality which can enable individuals to compete
internationally and to take advantage of freedom of
movement within the Community;

legal,

and

(11) Whereas the size, structure and funding of higher
education systems differ from Member State to
Member State and the objectives of these systems
will continue to evolve; whereas in certain Member
States the higher education system includes univer-
sities and other higher education institutions, often
pursuing vocational aims; whereas the concept,
scope and methods of quality assurance will be
defined by each Member State and will remain
flexible and adaptable to changing circumstances
and/or structures;

(12)

In view of Member States’ exclusive responsibilities
for the organisation and structure of their higher
education
budgetary
and
constraints, and in view of the autonomy and/or

systems

their

of

independence of higher education institutions, in
terms of the relevant structures in each Member
State,

I. HEREBY RECOMMENDS that Member States:

A. support and, where necessary, establish transparent
quality assurance systems with the following aims:

— to safeguard the quality of higher education
within the specific economic,
and
cultural context of their countries while taking
due account of the European dimension and of
a rapidly changing world,

social

— to encourage and help higher education insti-
tutions to use appropriate measures, particu-
larly quality
of
improving the quality of teaching and learning
and also training for research, another im-
portant part of their task,

assurance,

a means

as

quality

— to stimulate mutual exchanges of information
on
at
Community and world level and to encourage
cooperation between higher education institu-
tions in this area;

assurance

quality

and

B. base systems of quality assurance on the following

features, as explained in the Annex:

— autonomy and/or independence in terms of
the relevant structures in each Member State
for the bodies responsible for quality assurance
in their choice of procedures and methods,

— adaptation of quality assurance procedures and
methods to the profile and aims of higher
education institutions, while respecting their
autonomy and/or independence in terms of
the relevant structures in each Member State,

— targeted utilisation of internal and/or external
aspects of quality assurance adapted to the
procedures and methods used,

— involvement of the different parties concerned
according to the purpose of the quality assur-
ance,

— publication of quality assurance results in a
form which is appropriate to each Member
State;

C. where necessary, encourage higher education insti-
tutions, in cooperation with the competent struc-
tures of the Member States, to take appropriate
follow-up measures;

L 270/58

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

7. 10. 98

D. call upon the competent authorities and higher
education institutions to attach special importance
to the exchange of experience and cooperation
regarding quality assurance with other Member
States, as well as with international organisations
and associations active in the field of higher
education;

E. promote

authorities
cooperation between the
responsible for quality assessment or quality assur-
ance in higher education and promote networking.

This cooperation could cover some or all of the
following areas:

(a) encouraging and developing the exchange of
information and experience, in particular on
methodological developments and examples of
good practice;

(b) fulfilling the requests for expertise and advice
from the authorities concerned in the Member
States;

(c) supporting higher education institutions which
wish to cooperate in the field of quality assur-
ance on a transnational basis;

(d) promoting contacts with international experts.

In pursuing these objectives the developing links
between quality assurance and other existing
Community activities in particular in the frame-
work of
the Socrates and Leonardo da Vinci
programmes should be taken into account, as
should the ‘acquis communautaire' in the field of

recognition of qualifications
purposes.

for professional

II. HEREBY RECOMMENDS:

and on the basis of

that the Commission, in close cooperation with the
Member
existing
States
programmes and subject
to their objectives and
normal open and transparent procedures, encourage
the cooperation referred to in point I.E between the
authorities responsible for quality assessment and
quality assurance in higher education, also involving
organisations and associations of higher education
institutions with a European remit and the necessary
experience in quality assessment and quality assur-
ance.

III. HEREBY REQUESTS:

the Commission to present triennial reports to the
European Parliament, the Council, the Economic and
Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions
on progress in the development of quality assurance
systems in the various Member States and on co-
operation activities at European level including the
progress achieved with respect
to the objectives
referred to above.

Done at Brussels, 24 September 1998.

For the Council

The President

J. FARNLEITNER

7. 10. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 270/59

ANNEX

Indicative features of quality assurance

The features referred to below are common to existing European quality assurance systems. The European
pilot projects assessing the quality of higher education have demonstrated that all parties involved in this area
can benefit from observing these features.

The autonomy and/or independence, in terms of the relevant structures in each Member State, of the body
responsible for quality assurance (as regards procedures and methods) is likely to contribute to the effective-
ness of quality assurance procedures and the acceptance of their results.

Quality assurance criteria are closely linked to the aims assigned to each institution in relation to the needs of
society and of the labour market; the different quality assurance procedures must therefore include allowance
for the specific nature of the institution. Knowledge of the institution’s objectives, be it at the level of the
whole institution, at the level of a department or at the level of a single unit, is essential in this respect.

Quality assurance procedures should generally consist of an internal, self-examination component and an
external component based on appraisal by external experts.

The internal element of self-examination should aim to involve all the relevant players, especially teaching
staff and, where appropriate, administrators in charge of academic and professional guidance, as well as
students. The external element should be a process of cooperation, consultation and advice between independ-
ent experts from outside and players from within the institution.

In the light of the objectives and criteria used in the quality assurance procedure and with reference to the
structures of higher education in the Member States, professional associations, social partners and alumni
could be included in the expert groups.

The participation of foreign experts in the procedures would be desirable in order to encourage exchange of
experience acquired in other countries.

Reports on quality assurance procedures and their outcome should be published in a form appropriate to each
Member State and should provide a source of good reference material for partners and for the general public.