Commission Staff Working Document - Accompanying document to the Communication from the Commission - Annual Report from the European Commission to the European Parliament on the functioning of the European School System 2006 {COM(2007) 543 final}
Date: 2007-10-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European school, activity report, educational institution, financing, impact study, operation of the Institutions, organisation of teaching













EUR-Lex - 52007SC1199 - EN






Important legal notice




|



52007SC1199

Commission Staff Working Document - Accompanying document to the Communication from the Commission - Annual Report from the European Commission to the European Parliament on the functioning of the European School System 2006 {COM(2007) 543 final}  /* SEC/2007/1199 final */  








[pic] | COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES |Brussels, 1.10.2007SEC(2007) 1199COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENTAccompanying document to the COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION Annual Report from the European Commission to the European Parliament on the functioning of the European School System 2006 {COM(2007) 543 final}  ANNEX 1At the meeting of the Board of Governors on 14 November 2006, the Commission made the following statement for the minutes:“The Commission regrets, in the interest of the families concerned, that no complementary offer close to Laeken has been made despite a clear knowledge of the situation and hopes that the host country will consider the consequences of “the conditions which limit the options the host country can put forward”The Commission has consistently stated that Berkendael could represent welcome additional capacity and was in that respect an interesting offer in view of the overcrowding in the three current schools. However, the Commission has repeated many times that Berkendael, because of its’ location, cannot alone represent a satisfactory solution, in particular as a transitory site which would allow good conditions for families and pupils during the transitional period before the opening of Laeken. This statement is in line with the position adopted by the Board on its previous meetings in September and October 2006.”ANNEX 22007-D-151-EN-1Presidency Conclusions of the Ministerial Meeting on the Future of the European Schools en marge of the EU EYC – Council13 November 2006 - BrusselsDuring the meeting the Ministers and the Commission aware thatThe European Schools educational System has responded up to now to the main challenges that have arisen throughout their history. Nevertheless, the present European Schools system is now facing major difficulties to respond, with efficiency, to the evolutions of recent years (enlargement, implementation of the Union’s new agencies in Member States, increasing number of languages, amongst others.)The Commission has already raised these concerns in its Communication[1] of 20 July 2004 on “Options for developing the European School System”, which has also been sent to the European Union Education Ministers. The urgency to act was clearly recommended by the European Parliament in this context educational, administrative and financial aspects of the European Schools need to be adapted to the financial regulations of the European Institutions.This calls for main guidelines on the future of the European Schools.There was broad support to:1.  Welcome the new vision of a more flexible concept of a European Schooling System with clearly defined criteria, which could be applied in the future to three types of schools:Type I: These are the existing classical European Schools. To this respect some Member States urge the Board to reform some aspects of governance namely to reduce bureaucracy and improve the cost- effectiveness to introduce a more rational and equitable budget mechanism linked to the number of European Schools pupils of various nationalities was mentionedType II : These are national or international schools which provide European schooling to the children of European Union Staff where European Agencies or equivalents are about to be founded and are entitled to offer the European Baccalaureate. These Type II Schools will need to obtain accreditation given by the European School System. The schools in Parma, in Dunshauglin (which are accredited until the fifth secondary level) and in Heraklion (which is currently seeking accreditation from the Board of Governors), are here included .Type III : Independently of the existence of a European Union agency or institution, the possibility of having accredited schools entitled to offer the European Baccalaureate can be considered, if a Member State decides to take such an initiative. Despite the doubts expressed by some Members States about enlarging the scope of the European Baccalaureate there is sufficient consensus to define the terms of reference and to set up a pilot project prior to a decision on Type III Schools, with the objective to prepare a further decision on the feasibility and opportunity of implementing this type of school.2.  Accept that Type II and Type III schools will seek to provide a European Schooling based on a ‘common curriculum’, with as far as possible Mother Tongue Education. This common curriculum will conform to the requirements set by the European Schooling System regarding pedagogical targets, and conform to the demands regarding exams and accreditation.These elements will be supervised by the Board of Inspectors where all Member States are represented. The European Baccalaureate will be available in all Type I schools and, subject to specific additional accreditation procedures, in Parma and in Dunshauglin. The accreditation of Type II schooling in the primary and lower secondary cycles is unconnected with the accreditation for provision of the Baccalaureate, which may also be offered, after a proper evaluation, in the future Type II schools and, following a pilot phase, to Type III schools.3.  Emphasise that for all types of schools Attainment Contracts on pedagogical, administrative and financial requirements should be signed to guarantee the coherence, the quality and the accountability of the European Schooling System.4.  Note with satisfaction the large agreement on the evolution of the system towards a European Schooling System leading to the European Baccalaureate and on the principles of governance, which are highlighted below and shown in the enclosed Annexes A and B:The future system should be based on greater autonomy for schools which will be balanced by a greater accountability in pedagogical issues and, when relevant, in aspects of management/finance and governance, as illustrated in the Annex B. Agreements to this purpose, between the central management in Brussels and the individual schools, should be included in Attainment Contracts.The Board of Governors should steer the European Schooling System. In doing this, it should focus and decide on strategy, budgetary and political issues (however, the opening and closure of schools and language sections should be decided by the Board of Governors).The Bureau should be restructured. Among other executive tasks, as defined in scheme A, it should steer, where appropriate, the separate schools of the European Schooling System (within the context of Attainment Contracts) and prepare the issues concerning the employment conditions in consultation with the Member States.The Board of Inspectors should consist of inspectors for the nursery and primary cycles and for the secondary cycle of each Member State. Within the Board of Inspectors one inspector per Member State will ensure coordination of pedagogical matters as far as his State is concerned. The Board of Inspectors formulates and decides on pedagogical guidelines in the Attainment Contracts, decides on matters concerning inspection of quality assurance and control, advises the Board of Governors and implements the Board of Governors policy, forms the link between Member States and the schools and monitors the process. For type II schools the Board of Inspectors has a dual role. Not only does it check the conditions of accreditation, but it also guarantees the quality insurance of teaching and learning.Subcommittees of the Board of Inspectors may be set up by the Board of Governors according to the needs of the inspection of teaching and learning quality assurance and the control of the conditions of accreditation of Type II and Type III schools.The Administrative and Financial Committee in its current form should be replaced by the Budgetary Committee . This Committee would have mainly a double role. It would formulate budget financial guidelines and additionally monitor the financial and budgetary fulfilment of Attainment Contracts by the schools. It consists of one member of each Member State and the Commission. It should mainly give guidelines and deal with budget and control the financial and budgetary fulfilment of Attainment Contracts by the schools.An Independent Financial Control Evaluation and Audit Unit should be created to guarantee quality control on financial aspects, evaluation and expert advice to school directors. It will be in line with international standards and in coherence with the new Financial Regulation of the European Schools recently adopted by the Board of Governors.Cost – sharing should be considered.The Member States where the agencies will be established must bear a greater responsibility than in the current Type I schools for delivering European Schooling. Concerning the new Type II European Schools, the host countries will have to deliver the funding, whilst the European Union will contribute financially according to the number of children of EU Staff. The modalities and weight of the contributions from the European Union have to be worked out by the competent instancesIn respect of the cost of seconded teachers by Member States, it needs to be analysed in order to define measures to make it more equitable. Some Member States are in favour that there should be a closer relationship between the service received by member states from the European Schools and the payments they make to the European Schools budget.5.  Underline the authority of the Board of Governors as a guarantee that the European Schools should continue to be an Intergovernmental Organisation.6.  Invite the Board of Governors to further explore the details of the above political guidance and take concrete steps to:7.  improve governance according to the schemes included in the Annexes A and B by :- devolving more decision-making authority, including financial authority, to school management, to be balanced by greater accountability;- reforming the governance structure to achieve the aims of governance at school level and overall governance.- evaluating whether the necessary changes in Governance imply that the Convention in force should be changed, and if so, take the necessary steps to start this process.8.  analyse the measures and the practical implementation regarding Type II schools and take the necessary steps for their improvement and further development.9.  upgrade to international standards the organisation, administration and quality assurance aspects of the European Baccalaureate, beginning with an expert external evaluation exercise taken by the Board of Governors to identify the measures that need to be taken, before any decision to make the examinations available to schools outside the European Schools System;10.  foster equity as to the sharing of costs concerning the teachers seconded by the Member States to Type I Schools. Due to the situation created by the recent evolution of the European Union, the Board of Governors is invited to consider the necessary measures so that the allocation of the costs of the seconded teachers among the member states could be fair;11.  define the terms of reference of a pilot project regarding Type III schools, with the objective to inform a further decision on carrying into effect this type of schools. The terms of reference would be desirably approved in the Board of Governors in April 2007. These projects will be monitored by the Board of Governors and subject to evaluation every two years;The acting Portuguese presidency will take the necessary steps to prepare with the next presidency a follow–up ministerial meeting (Board of Governors meeting at ministerial level) to discuss the progress made on the above mentioned political guidance.[pic]ANNEX 3[pic][pic][1] COM(2004)519 final