Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the "Communication from the Commission — European benchmarks in education and training: follow-up to the Lisbon European Council" (COM(2002) 629 final)
Date: 2003-03-26
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: education policy, educational system

C 133/46

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

6.6.2003

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the
Commission — European benchmarks in education and training: follow-up to the Lisbon
European Council’

(COM(2002) 629 final)

(2003/C 133/10)

On 20 November 2002 the Commission decided to consult the European Economic and Social
Committee, under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-
mentioned communication.

The Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship, which was responsible for preparing the
Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 4 March 2003. The rapporteur was Mr Koryfidis.

At its 398th plenary session on 26 and 27 March 2003 (meeting of 26 March), the European Economic
and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 101 votes in favour, with one abstention.

1.

Introduction

1.1.
The strategic goal set by the Lisbon European Council
in March 2000 for Europe to become by 2010 ‘the most
competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the
world, capable of sustainable economic growth with more and
better jobs and greater social cohesion’ (1) has been crucial in
providing the momentum for closer European cooperation in
the field of education and training.

This cooperation (2), which is necessary in all respects,
1.2.
not only to achieve the Lisbon objectives, but more generally
with a view to European integration, has so far established a
number of
including the
following:

important points of

reference,

— an agreement (3) between the Heads of State and Govern-
ment on certain concrete common objectives for edu-
cation and training systems in Europe as part of the wider
principle of lifelong learning;

— a report (4) ‘on the concrete future objectives of education

and training systems’;

— a new overall goal (3) ‘to make Europe’s education and
training systems a world quality reference by 2010’;

— a joint detailed work programme (5) on the objectives of
education and training systems in Europe, including an
explanation of how the Open Method of Coordination
may be applied to the sector in question and provision
for the Commission and the Council to submit an interim
joint progress report on the implementation of the
programme to the Spring European summit in 2004.

1.3.
The present Communication is an attempt by the
Commission to fill a real gap, which is the lack of specific
European benchmarks for promoting the above-mentioned
programme and specifically for measuring progress towards a
particular goal as part of an objective system of comparative
assessment.

1.4.
It should be noted that, according to Articles 149
and 150 of the EU Treaty, the Member States have full
responsibility for teaching content and the organisation of
education and training systems. It therefore falls to the Member
States to take measures to achieve the common education
goals and the relevant Lisbon objectives. In this sense, the
Open Method of Coordination in the field of education and
training does not have the same implications or the same
ramifications in practice as it does in other EU policy areas
(e.g. the economy, employment).

Overall, the above observation does not undermine
1.4.1.
the substance of the Commission proposal on a European role
and European dimension in questions of education, training
and particularly lifelong learning. On the contrary, it demon-
strates the powerful momentum which has recently developed
in the EU towards achieving the Lisbon objectives. This
momentum is such that, in a number of cases, it is having the

( 1) Conclusions of the Lisbon European Council, 23-24 March 2000,

point 5.

( 2) The cooperation also includes the candidate countries.
( 3) Conclusions of the Barcelona European Council, 15-16 March

2002, point 43.

( 4) Council document 6365/02 of 14.2.2001.

(5) COM(2001) 501 final.

6.6.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 133/47

effect of breaking through the existing institutional barriers
and boundaries which stand in the way of meeting today’s
needs (1). Those needs relate to Europe’s position in the world
and its role in shaping a new and modern global political,
economic, social and technological balance. The driving force
and, at the same time, the objective of this momentum are the
knowledge, policies and tools associated with it and, by
extension, education.

2. The Commission proposal

The Commission proposal calls on the Council to

2.1.
adopt the following European benchmarks by May 2003 (2):

— By 2010, all Member States should at least halve the rate
of early school leavers, with reference to the rate recorded
in the year 2000, in order to achieve an EU-average rate
of 10 % or less.

population (25-64 age group) and in no country should
it be lower than 10 %.

2.2.
The Commission also emphasises as a sixth benchmark
(but first in terms of priority) achievement of the Lisbon
objective of substantial annual increases in per capita invest-
ments in human resources, and,
in this respect, calls on
the Member States to set transparent benchmarks (3) to be
communicated to the Council and Commission as provided
for in the detailed work programme on the objectives for
education and training systems.

The Commission supports its proposal for the Council

2.3.
to adopt the six European benchmarks above by

— giving specific reasons for its choice to keep the bench-

marks at European level (4);

— explaining how the indicators for monitoring progress

on each separate objective are determined (5);

— By 2010, Member States will have at least halved the level
of gender imbalance among graduates in mathematics,
science, technology whilst securing an overall significant
increase of the total number of graduates, compared to
the year 2000.

— adopting a specific standard format for measuring pro-

gress (6);

— defining what the Open Method of Coordination is and

how it will be used in the field of education (7).

— By 2010, Member States should ensure that average
percentage of 25-64 years olds in the EU with at least
upper secondary education reaches 80 % or more.

3. General comments

— By 2010, the percentage of low-achieving 15 year olds in
reading, mathematical and scientific literacy will be at
least halved in each Member State.

3.1.
learning (8),

In its opinions on education, training and lifelong
the EESC has highlighted the importance of

— By 2010, the EU-average level of participation in lifelong
learning should be at least 15 % of the adult working age

( 1) A typical example is the first of the points agreed by the Council
on 14 February 2002 (2002/C 58/01) which reads as follows:
‘The Council, the Member States and the Commission have the
responsibility for ensuring the outcome of the follow-up work,
each within their respective areas of competence. The Council, in
cooperation with the Commission, has responsibility for deciding
on the main subjects of the educational and training objectives as
well as on whether and where to use indicators, peer-reviews,
exchange of good practices and benchmarks’.

( 2) The purpose of the deadline is so that these benchmarks can be
taken into account in the interim report on implementation of
the detailed work programme on the objectives of education and
training systems in Europe, which the European Council has asked
the Commission and the Council to submit to the Spring European
summit in 2004.

(3) National benchmarks adopted by the Member States in these

fields, obviously on a voluntary basis.

(4) Point 1.3 and especially points 21 and 23 in COM(2002) 629

final.

(5) Points 16, 17 and 18 in COM(2002) 629 final.
(6) Point 16 in COM(2002) 629 final.
(7) Points 14 and 15 in COM(2002) 629 final.
(8) Including, in addition to those mentioned below, points 4.10
and 4.11 of
the opinion on the Communication from the
Commission to the Council and the European Parliament entitled
‘The eLearning Action Plan — Designing Tomorrow’s Education’
(OJ C 36, 8.2.2002), points 3.2. and 3.5.3 of the opinion on the
Commission staff working paper — Promoting language learning
and linguistic diversity (OJ C 85, 8.4.2003) and point 3.5 of the
opinion on the Proposal for a European Parliament and Council
Decision establishing a programme for the enhancement of
quality in higher education and the promotion of intercultural
understanding through cooperation with third countries (Erasmus
World) (2004-2008).

C 133/48

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

6.6.2003

cooperation in education to achieve the EU’s major current
objectives, for example:

— In its opinion (1) on the White Paper (2) on Education and
Training — Teaching and Learning: Towards the Learning
Society, the EESC felt that ‘... the aim of modernising and
upgrading educational and training systems and, most of
all, the aim of achieving a learning society, cannot be
reached by the Member States pursuing separate paths or
strategies, or by summit-level discussions, investigations
or choices. The only way to bring this about
is a
comprehensive and consciously systematic social effort.
This social effort must possess a common and acceptable
vehicle for coordination, common and acceptable pro-
cedures for reconciling opposing views and common,
clear and acceptable subordinate objectives. Only the
EU and its bodies, particularly the Commission, can
coordinate this social effort to bring about a learning
society’.

— In the own-initiative opinion entitled ‘The European
dimension of education: its nature, content and pros-
pects’ (3) it says that ‘the ESC calls for faster implemen-
tation of the positions adopted by the extraordinary
European Council in Lisbon. It also feels that an overall
effort is required to clarify terms and to define more
clearly the responsibilities and roles which will fall to the
various levels involved in education. Lastly,
it would
propose continuous monitoring and evaluation of all
measures at all levels, an exercise which the ESC is willing
to take part in’.

— In its opinion (4) on the Commission Memorandum on
Lifelong Learning, the EESC stated that ‘it considers
lifelong learning and areas of education relating to the
information society and the new economy to be part of
the European domain of education and learning, and
therefore recommends that they should be promoted as
part of an open method of coordination and comparative
assessment’.

3.2.
Based on the views expressed above, the EESC is clearly
in favour of the Commission proposal to lay down European
education benchmarks. Indeed, it considers the proposal to be

( 1) OJ C 295, 7.10.1996, point 2.3.
( 2) COM(95) 590 final.
( 3) OJ C 139, 11.5.2001, point 2.4.
( 4) OJ C 311, 7.11.2001, point 3.4.1 — last indent.

another step in the laborious and long-drawn-out process of
trying to develop a European dialogue to clarify educational
concepts and to identify and align education goals. These
efforts will have to be intensified still further, as achievement
of the Lisbon objectives, with which the process is directly
associated, requires modern education systems and common
high-level education objectives.

3.3. With this in mind, and with a view to the functionality
of the proposal and the greatest possible contribution to work
towards the EU’s major objectives, the EESC points out that:

— it considers the Commission’s proposal (5) to develop the
open method of coordination in the field of education to
be ambitious, but realistic;

— it also considers that the proposed method (6) for moni-
toring progress is effective with regard to both the
identification of comparable reality-based indicators in
each case and the overall image the EU presents to the
world and the education sector;

— it appreciates that the decision (7) not to translate the
proposed European benchmarks to national level for the
time being is necessary.

3.4.
The EESC agrees with the six specific European bench-
marks (8) submitted by the Commission to the Council for
approval, proposed as they are under Articles 149 and 150 of
the EC Treaty. However,
it would draw attention to an
important shortcoming, which is the failure to cover that
which was agreed upon (Council meeting on 14 February
2002) with regard to the three strategic objectives and the
detailed programme to implement the thirteen objectives
associated with these.

3.4.1.
The EESC therefore feels it is essential, since the
groundwork has been done, to add at least those associated
with strategic objective 3 (Opening up education and training
systems to the wider world) (9) to the European benchmarks
submitted for approval.

(5) COM(2002) 629 final, point 1.2.
(6) COM(2002) 629 final, point 1.2 and COM(2001) 501 final,

point 4.

(7) COM(2002) 629 final, point 23.
(8) Investment, early school leavers, graduates in science and tech-
nology, upper secondary education attainment, key competences
and lifelong learning.

(9) The associated objectives are:

— strengthening the links with working life and research, and

society at large

— developing the spirit of enterprise
— improving foreign language learning
— increasing mobility and exchange
— strengthening European cooperation (cf. Council conclusions

(2002/C 58/01))

6.6.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 133/49

3.4.2.
The reasons for the above proposal by the EESC are
simple and clear: strengthening the links with working life and
large; developing the spirit of
research, and society at
enterprise;
increasing
improving foreign language learning;
mobility and exchange and strengthening European cooper-
ation are also essential requirements for achieving the Lisbon
objectives and therefore any delay in promoting such measures
will mean taking that much longer to achieve those objectives.

3.5.3.
It should be pointed out that, in the new circum-
stances in which citizens operate (globalisation, new tech-
nologies, the rapid pace of scientific developments, competi-
tiveness, sustainable and viable development etc),
lifelong
learning is a necessity for all citizens, irrespective of the skills
they already have. Without letting up on efforts to get the low-
skilled (2) involved in lifelong learning, similar opportunities
must be given to all the other members of society as far as
possible, inter alia by certifying skills acquired in informal
types of education.

3.4.3.
It would be possible, inter alia, to use the correspond-
ing indicators from the employment policy guidelines as key
indicators for monitoring progress in the above areas.

3.5.
The EESC is particularly interested in the question of
lifelong learning and its contribution to achieving the Lisbon
objectives. It feels that the process of achieving the EU’s
strategic goal by 2010 mainly hinges on those who are already
in the labour market. In practice, this translates into a need for
more ambitious targets for citizens’ participation in lifelong
learning, more integrated measures and,
therefore, more
funding for the fastest possible development of the knowledge-
based society.

3.5.1.
In the context of European benchmarks, one of the
measures to ensure the effective functioning of lifelong learning
involves making clear how it relates to school education and
research (1). The EESC believes that lifelong learning and school
education must be seen as part of the same system. This system
must also link lifelong learning to research. This means
that
i.e.
they must be developed as a logically uniform,
comprehensive system wherever possible and that they must
adopt a coherent and complementary approach.

3.6.
The EESC thinks there should be a European bench-
mark for public spending on education as a proportion of
GDP. A minimum target for 2010 equivalent to the current
EU average (5 %) could generate rates of progress in line with
what is required for the Lisbon strategic objective.

3.7.
It is also worth pointing out that the data given in
the Communication refer to the 15 Member States. After
Copenhagen, the EESC wonders if it is feasible to extend the
scope of the European education benchmarks to take in the
new Member States. In any event, the EESC emphasises the
need for procedures by the Commission to ensure the smooth
incorporation of the new Member States into the whole system
of benchmarks.

The EESC appreciates the work done on indicators to
3.8.
date by the permanent team set up by the Commission.
However, one major minus point is the lack of indicators in
such areas as European integration, or familiarity with new
information and communications
technologies. This has
already increased the deficit which has existed for some time
in national education systems with regard to a European
dimension in education. The EESC therefore feels that there is
now the need to create a single scientific framework at
European level to take care of all the needs associated with
indicators of European interest.

3.5.2.
The EESC therefore feels that the proposed European
benchmark for lifelong learning should be modified to make it
more ambitious. A target of bringing the country with the
lowest performance today up to the level of the highest
performer by 2010 is ambitious, but necessary.

The Lisbon objectives

3.9.
include some particularly
important qualitative goals which are not covered in the
Commission proposal. These are:

— to convert schools and training centres into multifunc-
tional learning centres, accessible to all, using the most
appropriate methods to encompass a broad spectrum of
target groups, and

( 1) For further information, see point 4.2 of the opinion on the
Memorandum on lifelong learning, OJ C 311, 7.11.2001. See also
CES 71/2003, point 3.5.3, which states: ‘The EESC calls for cross-
border cooperation in the pre-school area between parents,
educators/teachers. The process of sensitising children to language
learning must begin very early and the foundations of lifelong
learning must be laid at the pre-school stage’.

(2) Point 59 in COM(2002) 629 final.

C 133/50

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

6.6.2003

— to set up mutually beneficial

learning collaborations
between schools, training centres, businesses and research
establishments.

measures to alleviate regional disparities or disparities associ-
ated with special social and individual needs.

3.9.1.
The foregoing comment is intended to highlight the
need to place particular emphasis on developing qualitative
indicators.

3.9.2.
The EESC would include among these indicators on
the independence of schools and their response to the
challenge of decentralisation, as well as on compensatory

4. Specific comments

4.1.
The EESC welcomes the intention to increase invest-
ment in education. However, the picture presented is unclear.
It therefore proposes that investment should be examined in
terms of amount per pupil, level and area of education, but in
conjunction with a breakdown of expenditure into fixed and
non-fixed items.

Brussels, 26 March 2003.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Roger BRIESCH

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the
Commission to the Council and the European Parliament — Towards a United Nations legally
binding instrument to promote and protect the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities’

(COM(2003) 16 final)

(2003/C 133/11)

On 24 January 2003, the Commission decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee,
under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned
communication.

The Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship, which was responsible for preparing the
Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 4 March 2003. The rapporteur was Mr Cabra
de Luna.

At its 398th plenary session on 26 and 27 March 2003 (meeting of 26 March), the European Economic
and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 98 votes in favour and no votes against with
two abstentions.

1. General Comments

and to do so without being discriminated against on the
grounds of disability.

1.1.
The European Economic and Social Committee wel-
comes the European Commission Communication ‘Towards a
United Nations legally binding instrument to promote and
protect the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities’ and
would like to stress its explicit support for some of the key
points made in this Communication.

The added value of a UN legally binding instrument is
1.2.
to recognise that people with disabilities are entitled to enjoy
the full range of internationally guaranteed rights and freedoms

Thematic conventions,

1.3.
like the Convention on the
Rights of the Child (CRC), the Convention against all Forms of
Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and the Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
(CERD), have demonstrated added value and complementarity
with the existing general human rights instruments, in particu-
lar the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and
the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights.