REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL on the implementation of the Council Recommendation on promoting automatic mutual recognition of higher education and upper secondary education and training qualifications and the outcomes of learning periods abroad
Date: 2023-02-23
Institutions: Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, European Commission
Subjects: application of EU law, cooperation in the field of education, educational exchange, higher education, recognition of diplomas, recognition of studies, recognition of vocational training qualifications, secondary education, student mobility, vocational training

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 23.2.2023  COM(2023) 91 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL on the implementation of the Council Recommendation on promoting automatic mutual recognition of higher education and upper secondary education and training qualifications and the outcomes of learning periods abroad     
 
 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

The Council Recommendation on “promoting automatic mutual recognition of higher 
education  and  upper  secondary  education  and  training  qualifications  and  the 
outcomes of learning periods abroad”1 was adopted by the Council on 26 November 
2018, based on the Commission proposal of 22 May 2018. It affirms the Commission’s 
intention to report to the Council within 4 years on the follow-up of the Recommendation, 
based on Member States' contributions. 

Automatic  mutual  recognition  (hereafter:  automatic  recognition)  is  key  for  students  to 
make the best possible use of all learning opportunities across Europe. It is a cornerstone 
of the European Education Area, which the Commission and the Council committed to 
establish by 2025 (see Commission Communication on Achieving the European Education 
Area  by  20252,  and    the  Council  Resolution  on  a  strategic  framework  for  European 
Cooperation  in  education  and  training  2021-2030)3.  It  is  also  a  key  flagship  of  the 
European strategy for universities4, presented in January 2022, and highly relevant for 
the  success  of  learners’  mobility  within  the  enhanced  Erasmus+  programme  (2021–
2027).  

Recognition  of  qualifications  falls  within  Member-State  competence.  It  is  guided  by 
national legislation and international agreements. At European level, the only binding legal 
text  is  the  1997  UNESCO5  and  Council  of  Europe  Lisbon  Recognition  Convention6, 
ratified by 54 State Parties, including all Member States with the exception of Greece. In 
addition, the concept of automatic recognition became a key commitment of the European 
Higher Education Area7 (Bologna process), which involves 49 countries, including all 
EU Member States, in the 2012 Bucharest Communiqué.  

The  ambition  of  the  Council  Recommendation  is  to  go  beyond,  by  encouraging  and 
facilitating Member States to go deeper and faster in their cooperation, in comparison to 
what they are able to do in the context of the Bologna process, building on the Bologna 
transparency tools8. 
The political commitment expressed first in the 2017 European Council Conclusions9 
and developed in the Council Recommendation establishes automatic recognition in the 
EU  context,  with  a  clear  definition  and  necessary  steps  to  accelerate  the  pace  of 
implementation, in order to make it a reality for learners and graduates, both for those who 
have gained qualifications and those who have had learning mobility experiences in the 
EU.  

1 
2 
3 
4 

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32018H1210(01) 
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52020DC0625 
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32021G0226(01) 
https://education.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/2022-01/communication-european-strategy-for-
universities-graphic-version.pdf 

5  The UNESCO Global Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications, adopted in 2019, establishes 
universal  principles  for  fair,  transparent  and  non-discriminatory  recognition  for  higher  education 
qualifications. The Convention shall enter into force in the first quarter of 2023, as 20 states parties have 
ratified it.  
https://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list?module=treaty-detail&treatynum=165 
http://ehea.info/ 
brosura_v1_v12_vp_120419_text (ehea.info) 
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/32204/14-final-conclusions-rev1-en.pdf 

6 
7 
8 
9 

 
      
                                                 
Four  years  after  the  adoption  of  the  Recommendation,  the  purpose  of  this  report  is  to 
analyse the progress made and the lessons learned so as to have all the steps in place by 
2025. 

This report will inform the work on new initiatives, such as the new Learning Mobility 
Framework  planned  in  the  2023  Commission  Work  Programme.  Indeed,  the  smooth 
recognition of qualifications and learning outcomes is the cornerstone of learning mobility. 
Work related to the implementation of the Recommendation can also inspire and facilitate 
progress  with  regard  to  the  recognition  of  qualifications  gained  outside  the  EU  as 
announced in the 2022 State of the Union address by President von der Leyen10. Moreover, 
the report is important for the work towards a joint European degree. 

2.  THE POLICY OBJECTIVES SET OUT IN THE COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION 

The Council Recommendation recommends that Member States put in place, by 2025, the 
steps  necessary  to  ensure  that  every  pupil,  apprentice  or  student  who  has  completed  a 
learning experience in one Member State can have this experience, either in the form of a 
qualification or of learning outcomes, automatically recognised in the others to continue 
his or her studies. 

Automatic recognition is understood in this context as follows: 

 

  a  qualification  at  higher  education  level  acquired  in  one  Member  State  is 
automatically  recognised  at  the  same  level  in  any  other  Member  State,  for  the 
purpose of granting access to further studies. 
the outcomes from a learning period abroad at higher education level in one 
Member State are automatically and fully recognised in the others, as agreed 
beforehand in a learning agreement and confirmed in the Transcript of Records, in 
line with the European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System. Credits gained 
during the period of study in another Member State or during a virtual mobility are 
transferred  without  delay  and  counted  towards  the  student’s  degree  without  any 
additional work or assessment of the student. 

  an  upper  secondary  qualification  giving  access  to  higher  education  in  one 
Member  State  is  automatically  recognised  in  any  other  Member  State,  for  the 
purpose of granting access to higher education. 

  at upper secondary level, the right to have the learning outcomes from a learning 
period abroad in one Member State recognised in the country of origin, provided 
that the learning outcomes are broadly in line with those in the national curricula 
of the country of origin. 

The Council Recommendation does not prejudice the right of the other Member States’ 
authorities to verify the authenticity and the level of the qualification and if it really gives 
access  to  higher  education  in  the  Member  State  of  issuance.  However,  this  verification 
does  not  involve  any  separate  recognition  procedure.  Automatic  recognition  does  not 
prejudice the right of higher education institutions to set specific criteria for admission 
to their specific programmes. 

In the Council Recommendation, Member States are recommended to ensure the creation 
of  the  necessary  framework  conditions,  trust  and  transparency  within  their  education 
systems for automatic recognition, namely to: 

  Adapt national legislation, where relevant, to introduce automatic recognition as 
defined above for all EU Member States, with the necessary conditions in place. 

10  https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/SPEECH_22_5493 

2 

 
                                                 
  Fully  implement  the  European  and  Bologna  higher  education  transparency 
tools  that  can  support  recognition  -  the  Diploma  Supplement  and  the  European 
Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS); fulfil the key commitments of 
the Bologna Process for higher education (three cycle system, implementation of 
the  Standards  and  Guidelines  for  Quality  Assurance,  full  implementation  of  the 
Lisbon  Recognition  Convention)  and  reference  qualifications  in  the  European 
Qualifications Framework; 

  Develop national guidance to support higher and secondary education and training 
institutions  in  effectively  implementing  automatic  recognition  and  develop  the 
capacity and strengthen the role of National Academic Recognition Information 
Centres  (NARICs)  and  credential  evaluators,  in  particular  with  regard  to 
information  dissemination  and  the  use  of  online  tools  to  improve  efficiency, 
transparency and consistency; 
Improve the evidence base by collecting and disseminating data on the extent and 
nature of recognition cases for the purpose of this Council Recommendation. 

 

3.  STATE OF PLAY IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF AUTOMATIC RECOGNITION 

This report provides an analysis of the steps put in place by Member States four years after 
the  adoption  of  the  Council  Recommendation.  It  also  intends  to  go  beyond  legislative 
measures in place and to check de facto implementation on the ground, whenever evidence 
is available on the practice of recognition. 

Below a summary of the key findings of the report (see country assessment in Annex). 

In  the  field  of  higher  education,  while  a  number  of  steps  have  been  put  in  place  by 
Member  States  to  ensure  the  necessary  framework  conditions,  trust  and  transparency 
within their education systems, more needs to be done by 2025: 

  National 

legislation 

for  automatic  recognition  of  higher  education 
qualifications  from  all EU Member States  is  in place in  12 Member States.  3 
additional Member States are in the process of adapting their national legislation. 
And  9  other  Member  States  makes  it  available  for  a  limited  number  of  EU 
countries.  

  The  Bologna  and  EU  transparency  tools  are  in  place  in  most  of  the  Member 
States. However, there are still 11 Member States where these tools are not fully 
implemented. This is hampering the necessary trust between Member States and 
systems. 

  14 Member States have in place national guidance for institutions, together with 

regular training provision and utilisation of online tools for recognition decisions.   

  7 Member States monitor and evaluate recognition decisions through a  central 
system-level  database  that  collects  and  disseminates  data  on  recognition  cases, 
and that is regularly updated. Such lack of data in other Member states hamper the 
assessment of de facto implementation of automatic recognition on the ground. 

While  the  existence  of  formal  legislation  in  the  field  of  higher  education  is  a  key 
prerequisite for automatic recognition, available evidence, even if limited, shows that it is 
a necessary but not a sufficient condition: 

  Decision making for automatic recognition is done centrally by a competent body 
in 3 Member States. In all other Member States, the decision on recognition of 
qualifications is decentralised to higher education institutions. Available evidence 
shows  that  such  a  decentralised  application  of  a  system-level  legal  framework 
increases the risk of inconsistent application of automatic recognition.  

3 

 
  The available evidence gathered through a survey to higher education institutions 
points to a mixed picture on the implementation of automatic recognition of 
higher  education  qualifications  at  institutional  level,  with  inconsistencies 
between  institutions,  or  even  within  the  same  institution  by  different  credential 
evaluators.  An  important  reason  is  the  confusion  between  recognition  and 
admission,  especially  that  automatic  recognition  does  not  mean  automatic 
admission. As most recognition decisions are done by higher education institutions, 
for being able to make a sound assessment, it would be necessary to have more 
information about whether and to what extent application is consistent and in line 
with the regulations in place. 

  When it comes to automatic recognition of learning periods abroad, the only 
available data is the one from the Erasmus+ programme. The European average in 
2020 was 84.4% of credits automatically recognised, with substantial differences 
between countries. The new Erasmus+ quality framework for the period 2021-2027 
has  been  set  in  place  to  achieve  full  automatic  recognition  of  learning  periods 
abroad through Erasmus+.  

More efforts are also needed in the field of upper secondary education and training: 

  Automatic  recognition  of  qualifications  in  upper  secondary  education  and 
training  (general  education  and  VET)  is  rather  well  developed  in  15  Member 
States  (plus  1  exclusively  for  general  school  education)  providing  automatic 
recognition  or  at  maximum  a  check  of  the  qualification  against  a  database  of 
recognition decisions. 6 further Member States have automatic recognition in place 
for qualifications from a limited number of other Member States (usually through 
bilateral  agreements  or  unilateral  decisions),  5  Member  States  (plus  1  for  VET) 
have no automatic recognition in place. Challenges in this field remain largely the 
same as before the adoption of the Recommendation. 

  When it comes to the recognition of outcomes of learning periods abroad for 
upper  secondary  education,  8  Member  States  offer  a  form  of  automatic 
recognition broadly in line with the Council Recommendation (2 Member States 
based on equivalence, 6 Member States based on learning outcomes). Beyond this, 
the situation  has not  progressed much. A majority  of Member States  recognises 
outcomes only based on a de-centralised form of curriculum-matching, a usually 
long and tedious procedure that often involves extra exams for the learners as well 
as uncertainty. Additional Member States don’t offer any recognition procedures 
outside  of  very  specific  programmes.  10  Member  States  offer  no  form  of 
standardised recognition procedure or even a lack of recognition procedure overall. 

The Commission sees a continued need to increase efforts towards the implementation of 
the Council Recommendation and make substantial progress by 2025, based on the main 
findings of this report.  

3.1. 

State of play for higher education 

Automatic  recognition  in  higher  education  for  qualifications  and  for  learning  periods 
abroad both require legislation and supporting tools in place in order to be implemented. 
In the next chapter, the existence of these enabling factors is discussed.  

4 

 
 
Tools to improve trust

•European Standard and 
Guidelines for Quality 
Assurance

Tools to improve recognition 
process

•Improved capacity for recognition 

authorities

•Registration in the European 
Quality Assurance Registry

•National Guidance for institutions
•Monitoring recognition decisions

Tools to improve 
transparency

•National Qualifications 

Framework

•Diploma Supplement
•DEQAR
•Digital information tools

Tools to improve 
transparency

•Europen Credit 
Transfer and 
Accumulation System 
(ECTS)

National 
legislation to 
enable automatic 
recognition

Tools to improve trust

•European Standard and 
Guidelines for Quality 
Assurance

•Erasmus Charter for 

Higher Education (ECHE)

Automatic 
Recognition of 
Qualifications

Tools to improve 
recognition process

•Learning Agreement
•Transcript of records
•Digital tools to facilitate  

student exchanges

Automatic 
Recognition 
of learning 
periods 
abroad

3.1.1. Progress made at national level  

3.1.1.1. Adaptation of national law11 

Relevant national legislation is a prerequisite for automatic recognition, although it does 
not necessarily mean that it is correctly applied on the ground.  

In 2018, at the time of the adoption of the Council Recommendation, eight Member States 
(DE,  DK,  FI,  FR,  MT,  PL,  RO  and  SE)  already  had  automatic  recognition  for  all  EU 
countries embedded in their national legislation. Four countries  (AT, HR, IT and ES), 
which either considered  that they  apply automatic recognition  in  practice, or wanted to 
move  towards  automatic  recognition,  adapted  their  legislation  following  the  Council 

11  Report on the Implementation of the Council Recommendation on automatic recognition 2023 drafted 
by ICF S.A as part of the Study on progress the implementation of the 2018 Council Recommendation 
on automatic mutual recognition of education and training qualifications and the outcomes of learning 
periods abroad as well as of the feasibility of a European Recognition and Quality Assurance system  

5 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Recommendation.  To  be  noted  that  in  Spain,  the  new  law  introducing  automatic 
recognition is valid for all EU Member states, except for a subset of degrees. 

In addition, three countries (CZ, EL and SK) are currently in the process of adapting their 
national legislation. 

Nine  Member  States  introduced  automatic  recognition  for  a  subset  of  countries,  (for 
example,  by  establishing  or  expanding  regional  multilateral  agreements)  or  for  certain 
qualifications: 

  The multilateral Treaty on Automatic Recognition was signed between the Baltic 
and Benelux countries in 2021. Until now, BE–Fl12, LV and EE have ratified it. 
It builds on the 2004 Reykjavik declaration that promotes automatic recognition 
of comparable qualifications in higher education between Nordic countries. 

  Building on bilateral agreements existing before 2018 between PL and CZ, a new 
multilateral agreement is being put into place between 4 countries (CZ, HU, PL, 
SK). Slovenia has bilateral agreements with its neighbouring countries. 

Legislative reforms towards automatic recognition since 2018 

Legislative reform towards 
automatic recognition for all 
countries since 2018 
Automatic recognition for all 
countries prior to 2018 

Legislative reform towards 
automatic recognition for 
some countries since 2018 

Legislation towards 
automatic recognition in 
planning phase 

No reform towards 
automatic recognition since 
2018  

Source: 
Commission 

European 

The creation of such regional agreements is seen by some countries as a way forward in 
implementing  automatic recognition  for all EU Member States  that apply the  European 
and Bologna transparency tools. To be noted that Portugal has taken a specific approach 
for  recognition  since  2007,  which  entails  applying  automatic  recognition  for  the 
qualifications that are listed in a decree law. 

Other countries do not have plans for legislative alignment yet (BG, CY, and IE).  

Among  the  12  countries  having  their  national  legislation  adapted  for  automatic 
recognition,  decision  making  for  automatic  recognition  is  done  centrally  by  a 

12   Belgium - Flemish community  

6 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
competent body in 3 countries. In all other Member States, the decision on recognition of 
qualifications is decentralised to higher education institutions.  This may lead to lack of 
consistency  of  recognition  decisions;  practices  may  vary  even  between  faculties  (see 
section 3.1.1.5).  

It raises the question as to whether a system-level decision (the right of an individual to 
access  higher  education  at  any  level)  should  be  made  by  individual  higher  education 
institutions, or better kept at system level with national authorities. 

3.1.1.2. Implementation of the Bologna transparency tools 

The systematic implementation of Bologna tools is indispensable for automatic recognition 
in the higher education field. Despite long-standing commitments, implementation is still 
uneven across the EU. 

  The European Quality Assurance Register13 (EQAR) 

Trust  in  the  quality  assurance  system  of  a  country  is  a  prerequisite  for  automatic 
recognition. Registration in the European Quality Assurance Registry of the external 
quality assurance agencies signals that the country’s quality assurance agency operates in 
line  with  the  Standards  and  Guidelines  for  Quality  Assurance  in  the  European  Higher 
Education  Area  (ESG)14. Currently,  of  the  27  Member  States,  22  use  quality  assurance 
agencies registered in EQAR15. The five other countries are either currently under ongoing 
EQAR review (SK and EL) for compliance with the ESG or are considering applying soon 
(IT, MT and CZ).  

In  the  Database  of  External  Quality  Assurance  Results  (DEQAR),  institutions  can 
upload  and  users  can  find  information  on  quality  assurance  reviews  with  one  click, 
avoiding duplications of evaluations. National Academic Recognition Information Centres 
(NARICs) from IT, FR, NL and RO are integrating an automatic DEQAR search in their 
workflows for recognition (with Erasmus+ programme support). 

  The European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System guidelines (ECTS) 

ECTS is a student-centred credit system based on the student workload required to achieve 
specified  learning  outcomes.  As  such,  it  is  essential  for  facilitating  the  recognition  of 
students’ learning achievements during credit mobility16 periods in a comparable way.  

The effective implementation of ECTS is highly dependent on the actions of autonomous 
higher education institutions. However, it is important that the national level also assumes 
responsibility, supports and incentivises the correct use of ECTS (in line with the 2015 
ECTS  Users’  Guide17),  beyond  the  Erasmus+  programme.  It  is  a  legal  requirement  for 
external quality assurance agencies to refer to the key principles of ECTS in their review 
in  22  Member  States18.  In  the  other  5  Member  States  (IE,  LV,  SE,  SK,  SI),  it  is  not 
included, although ECTS is still widely used. However, the implementation of the ECTS 

13  https://www.eqar.eu/ 
14  https://www.enqa.eu/esg-standards-and-guidelines-for-quality-assurance-in-the-european-higher-

education-area/ 

15  https://www.eqar.eu/kb/country-information/ 
16  Credit mobility can be defined as a limited period of study or traineeship abroad (in the framework of 
on-going  studies  at  a  home  institution)  for  the  purpose  of  gaining  credits.  After  the  mobility  phase, 
students return to their home institution, where the credits are recognised and they complete their studies. 

17  https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/da7467e6-8450-11e5-b8b7-01aa75ed71a1 
18  https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/c90aaf32-4fce-11eb-b59f-

01aa75ed71a1/language-en/format-PDF/source-183354043 

7 

 
                                                 
Users' Guide 2015 principles is fully monitored by the national quality assurance agency 
in 6 systems19 only. 

  Diploma supplement (DS) 

The DS is a key commitment of the Erasmus Charter for Higher Education for higher 
education institutions to be eligible to benefit from the Erasmus+ programme. It contains 
information on qualifications that enables credential evaluators to understand the level and 
academic rights of the qualification holder, and it is available in a digitalised format in the 
Europass Platform20. Beyond the Erasmus+ programme, it is issued automatically, free of 
charge  and  in  a  widely  spoken  language  for  all  graduates  in  23  Member  States21.  The 
Member States that do not issue DS automatically are FR, ES and EL (which does not issue 
it  to  first  and  second  cycle  graduates),  and  while  IE  requires  a  fee  for  the  additional 
administrative workload. 

3.1.1.3. Development of national guidance22 

While DK, RO and SE have a fully centralised decision system for recognition, in all other 
Member States, it is either the decision of the higher education institutions, or the top-level 
authority delegates responsibility for the implementation to them.  In all these countries, 
national  guidance  is  key  to  support  higher  education  institutions  in  implementing 
automatic recognition effectively. 

In practice, online services and guidance to support standardised practices among higher 
education institutions have been produced by fourteen Member States (BG, DK, EE, FI, 
FR, DE, EL, IT, MT, NL, PL, RO, ES, SE).  

3.1.1.4. Monitoring and evaluation23 

Systematic monitoring of recognition decisions is in place in 7 Member States (BG, IT, 
LU, NL, PT, RO, SK). 

The lack of monitoring of recognition decisions makes it difficult to identify the most 
problematic issues and to take appropriate measures to address them. 

Lack of data makes it also difficult to assess the extent to which automatic recognition is 
de facto implemented in an education system. 

3.1.1.5. Implementation at institutional level 

Automatic recognition of qualifications is linked to the access rights of individuals for a 
set of learning provisions24. While a specific qualification may give formal/general access 
to all programmes at the next level of study, it does not automatically ensure the right of 
admission  to  a  specific  programme.  Each  higher  education  institution  or  competent 
national authority has the right to set specific admission criteria. 
A  survey25  carried  out  among  higher  education  institutions  shows  a  mixed  picture 
regarding practice on the ground concerning the automatic recognition of qualifications. 

19  Mobility scoreboard 2019 - BE-Flanders, FR, IT, LT, NL, FI 
20  https://europa.eu/europass/en 
21  Bologna Implementation Report 2020 
22   “ICF Report on the Implementation of the Council Recommendation on automatic recognition” 2023 
23   “ICF Report on the Implementation of the Council Recommendation on automatic recognition” 2023 
24     The Triangle of Automatic Recognition 
25    “ICF Report on the Implementation of the Council Recommendation on automatic recognition” 2023; 

     sample size: 441 

8 

 
                                                 
The  understanding  and  implementation  of  automatic  recognition  by  higher  education 
institutions also varies within the same country.  

The  main  reasons  for  non-automatic  recognition  were:  case-by-case  comparison  of 
workload and learning outcomes; general system-level conditions (European qualifications 
frameworks level); admission criteria.  

It  shows  that  there  is  still  a  confusion  on  the  definition  of  automatic  recognition, 
including that it does not mean automatic admission.  The confusion also comes from the 
fact  that  recognition  and  admission  processes  are  often  combined  at  institutional  level: 
38% of respondents said they handle them together. In addition, one third of the institutions 
check the quality assurance processes of the other institution when deciding on whether to 
recognise a qualification. 

It is to be noted that only 53% of the institutions said that they keep a record of recognition 
decisions. 

Self-assessment of higher education institutions automatically recognising BA and MA degrees 

N=421 

Source: ICF/3s 

Recognition decisions of learning periods abroad are taken by institutions, and in most 
cases at faculty level. 

According  to  the  survey  carried  out  among  higher  education  institutions,  only  47%  of 
higher education institutions keep a database on recognition decisions for learning periods 
abroad,  which  makes  it  difficult  to  assess  the  level  of  implementation  of  the  Council 
recommendation. 

9 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Studies show that remaining bottlenecks are linked to the perceived quality concerns at 
faculty level by some professors. Over 10% of mobile students are dissatisfied with the 
process of recognition of their credits and a slightly higher share are dissatisfied with the 
information they receive on grade and ECTS transfer. The absence of a ‘mobility window’ 
in study programmes increases the level of uncertainty for mobile students.  

In the EU, most learning mobility (53%) takes place within the framework of the Erasmus+ 
Programme.  Erasmus+  mobility  data,  based  on  the  feedback  from  Erasmus+  students, 
show  that  the  share  of  students26  who  received  in  2020  full  recognition  of  all  credits 
obtained was 84,4% on average, with significant differences between Member States. 

Source: European Commission 

The new Erasmus+ quality framework for the period 2021-2027 has been set in place to 
achieve  full  automatic  recognition  of  learning  periods  abroad  across  the  EU  through 
Erasmus+.  

3.1.1.6. Conclusions 

Decisions  on  recognition  are  most  often  left  to  the  discretion  of  the  higher  education 
institutions themselves, which leads to inconsistencies in the implementation of automatic 
recognition. As institutional practices vary, it is often difficult to determine whether the 
recognition  practice  is  fully  automatic  within  a  country,  even  if  the  national  legislation 
allows for automatic recognition. One of the difficulties lies in the fact that recognition and 
admission processes are often combined at institutional level. This has led to confusion 
about the implications of automatic recognition, and raises difficulties in ensuring that a 
coherent (automatic) approach is used in all higher education institutions.  

More fundamentally, it raises the question as to whether it makes sense for a system-level 
decision  to  be  made  by  individual  higher  education  institutions.  The  higher  education 
landscape,  governance  structures  and  personnel  responsible  for  recognition  change 
continuously.  Moreover,  the  absence  of  central  guidance  and  the  lack  of  monitoring  of 
recognition decisions makes it difficult to detect inconsistencies.  

When  adapting  national  legislation,  Member  States  might  consider  ensuring 
consistency of implementation by giving the competence for automatic recognition 
decisions to a dedicated body (for example a NARIC), while higher education institutions 

26  Number of respondents is 589.484 over 4 years 

10 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
would keep their autonomy in selecting and admitting students to their programmes. Thus, 
the distinction between recognition and admission would become clearer in practice. 

Member States may also encourage higher education institutions to integrate recognition 
processes 
full 
implementation of the 2015 ECTS Users Guide. It would improve the transparency and 
consistency of recognition practices within institutions for learning periods abroad. 

internal  quality  assurance  procedures, 

including 

their 

into 

Consistent decision making could be supported with digital solutions such as databases. A 
systematic  approach  for  the  monitoring  and  evaluation  of  recognition  decisions  for 
qualifications and individual learning mobility would improve transparency and contribute 
to evidence-based decision-making. 

3.1.2. Support from the Commission since 2018 

The Commission provides support and has developed tools to reinforce Member States’ 
efforts to implement automatic recognition. 

3.1.2.1. Fostering mutual trust and peer learning among Member States and 

institutions 

The  Commission  facilitated  the  regular  exchange  of  good  practices  between  Member 
States as part of the working groups of the Strategic Framework for European cooperation 
in education and training (ET 2020)27 and the subsequent strategic framework for European 
cooperation  in  education  and  training  towards  the  EEA  and  beyond  (EEA  strategic 
framework for 2021-2030).  

Since 2018, automatic recognition has been discussed at each working group meeting and 
has  also  regularly  been  on  the  agenda  of  meetings  of  the  Directors  General  for  higher 
education.  In  addition,  a  peer  learning  seminar  dedicated  to  the  implementation  of 
automatic recognition took place in 2019, organised by the Commission together with the 
Norwegian government. 
The  European  Education  Area28  portal  acts  as  a  hub  for  information  on  the  Council 
Recommendation and provides support for its implementation. 

3.1.2.2. The Erasmus Charter for Higher Education (ECHE) 

Every higher education institution wishing to benefit from Erasmus+ funds needs to have 
an ECHE29 accreditation. So far, 5206 higher education institutions are accredited with an 
ECHE for 2021-2027.  It means  that about  95% of students  in  the EU are studying at  a 
university that participate in the Erasmus+ Programme.  

In  the  new  ECHE  for  the  new  Erasmus+  Programme  (2021-2027),  holders  commit  to 
ensuring full automatic recognition, according to the definition provided in the Council 
Recommendation,  of  all  credits  gained  for  learning  outcomes  satisfactorily  achieved 
during  a  period  of  study/training  abroad.  The  correct  use  of  ECTS  and  the  automatic 
issuance  of  the  Diploma  Supplement  are  also  key  commitments  of  ECHE-holders.  The 
implementation is monitored by Erasmus+ National Agencies. 

27  Education and training 2020 - Publications Office of the EU (europa.eu) 
28  https://education.ec.europa.eu/education-levels/higher-education/inclusive-and-connected-higher-

education/automatic-recognition-of-qualifications 

29    https://erasmus-plus.ec.europa.eu/resources-and-tools/erasmus-charter-for-higher-education  

11 

 
 
                                                 
3.2. 

State of play for upper secondary education 

3.2.1. Progress made at national level 

3.2.1.1. State of play of recognition of upper secondary education and training 

qualifications giving access to higher education 

The Council Recommendation called for substantial progress towards automatic mutual 
recognition, so that an upper secondary education and training qualification giving access 
to higher education is automatically recognised also in other Member States. 

About  half  of  the  Member  States  have  systems  in  place  that  meet  this  objective;  5 
Member States don’t have any form of automatic recognition in place. To highlight a few 
of the positive examples, in  PL, the assessment/statement of comparability is  generated 
automatically  via  the  NARIC's  Kwalifikator  online  tool  (for  general  education,  but  not 
VET).  FR  offers  direct  online  applications  to  universities  without  the  need  for  further 
recognition process. In a few Member States, some form of automatic recognition, either 
required by law or applied in practice, is based on bilateral or multilateral agreements with 
other Member States (e.g. AT, CZ for SK, SK for CZ and EE/LT/LV for each other), or 
unilateral decisions (SI for HR). 

In many Member States, the responsibility for recognition lies with higher education 
institutions, with practices varying within the Member State. Some NARICs offer online 
(and offline) services and guidance on the assessment of equivalence (AT, BE-Fr30), DE, 
EE, ES, IE, IT, NL, PL, PT and SI) in some Member States in the form of (public) online 
databases (e.g. DE and IT). In SE and ES, experts on specific countries are based at higher 
education institutions and support the decision-making process. 

Some  Member  States  are  developing  procedures  to  assess  curricular  convergence, 
comparing study programmes individually. Some require  additional exams  (CZ, HU 
and SK). However, upper secondary education and training is not included in proposed 
legislative changes in several Member States working on recognition (e.g. CZ, ES, EL and 
LT) whose initiatives focus on higher education qualifications31. 

Some  countries  have  differences  between  general  upper  secondary  education  and 
VET. For example, in PL, automatic recognition is in place for general upper secondary 
education qualifications, but not for VET qualifications. 

In summary, some initiatives, such as central databases, including with public access, stand 
out as good examples of progress towards automatic recognition. However, many of them 
were  already  launched  before  the  adoption  of  the  Recommendation.  The  limited  recent 
progress  is  often  due  to  lack  of  initiative  by  higher  education  institutions  rather  than  a 
central system provided by Member States. Challenges in this field remain largely the 
same as before the adoption of the Recommendation 

3.2.1.2. Recognition of learning periods abroad 

The Council Recommendation highlights that automatic recognition should be provided as 
long as ‘the learning outcomes [are] broadly in line with those in the national curricula of 
the country of origin’. 

 Belgium- French-speaking community 

30 
31   ‘ICF Report on the Implementation of the Council Recommendation on automatic recognition” 2023 

12 

 
                                                 
For short learning periods abroad, referring usually to periods between several days and 
up to 3 months, there is usually no need for recognition as a condition for a pupil to be 
reintegrated into the sending school, due to the short duration and the direct involvement 
of the schools. 

For long-term learning periods abroad, usually between 3 months and an entire school 
year,  there  are  three  approaches  in  line  with  the  Council  Recommendation  that  can  be 
described as automatic recognition: 

  Recognition based on equivalence 
The period abroad is  considered  as  equivalent  to  the same period in  the  home country, 
regardless of any differences in curricula between the sending and host schools, and the 
pupil  is  readmitted  to  the  corresponding  grade  or  admitted  to  next  grade,  if  a  limited 
number of principles and criteria are respected. 

o  In AT, recognition is based on school attendance for a minimum 5 months and a 

maximum of 1 year. 

o  In PT, learning periods abroad of one year are automatically recognition based on 

successful completion of the school year. 

  Recognition based on learning outcomes determined to be broadly in line with the 

sending institutions curriculum 

Member  States  have  established  an  official  system-level  procedure  that  identifies  the 
outcomes of a learning period abroad and determines whether they are broadly in line with 
those of the national curriculum of the country of origin. This is the case in BG, DK, FI, 
FR in VET, IT and RO, with different practices in each of the Member States. 

  Recognition based on a signed learning agreement 
Before  the  learning  period  abroad,  sending  school  and  hosting  school  as  well  as  the 
learner  jointly  discuss  what  learning  objectives  need  to  be  met  to  fulfil  the  learning 
requirements  in  both  educational  systems.  After  returning,  the  achieved  learning 
outcomes  are  measured  against  the  learning  agreement  and,  if  in  line,  automatically 
recognised. This approach is in the spirit of the Council Recommendation and is widely 
implemented in the Erasmus+ programme but has not seen widespread use in learning 
mobilities outside the Erasmus+ programme. 

However, in most Member States, recognition is still not automatic: 

-  Almost half of the Member States  have an official  procedure based on  curriculum 
matching  performed  by  a  variety  of  actors  (schools,  individual  teachers,  local 
authorities)  and  usually  require an assessment on subjects  not  followed abroad:  this 
applies to one third of Member States (BE-Fr, CY, CZ, DE, HR, HU, IE, LT, LV, PT 
for learning periods of less than 1 school year, SI, SK and ES). 

-  Some Member States have an assessment by both the sending and host school as part 
of a school-to-school partnership to bypass any formal recognition procedure in this 
case (e.g. in FR in school education). 

-  Many Member States (e.g. BE-De, BE-Fl, EE, EL, LU, MT, NL, PL and SE) have not 
implemented any unified recognition procedure or guidelines. An expert network 
set  up  by  the  Commission  as  part  of  a  preparatory  action  initiated  by  the  European 
Parliament, also found that in many Member States, schools lack the necessary skills 

13 

 
to recognise learning periods abroad within their school system and curriculum due to 
the lack of system-level procedures32. 

In addition to the recognition procedures, the status of mobile learners during a mobility 
period  remains  an  issue.  In  several  school  systems,  pupils  going  abroad  for  long-term 
mobility are no longer registered in a school in their country of origin, neither do they have 
a clear status in their host school, making it difficult to record or assess learning outcomes. 

To  sum  up,  progress  has  been  achieved  for  the  automatic  recognition  of  outcomes  of 
learning periods abroad in upper secondary education, but it has been more limited 
than progress for qualifications. A total of seven Member States (AT, BG, DK, FI, IT, PT 
for  periods  of  one  year  and  RO)  have  a  system  or  procedure  in  place  that  qualifies  as 
automatic recognition in line with the Council Recommendation. In a majority of Member 
States, recognition depends on decisions of local authorities or individual education and 
training institutions based on curriculum-matching or is even impossible. The challenges 
remain  largely  the  same  as  the  ones  that  led  to  the  adoption  of  the  Council 
Recommendation.  Comparison  between  curricula,  discrepancies  between  recognition 
procedures (often even a lack of standardised procedures at national level), and the absence 
of a status or framework for mobile learners still need to be tackled. 

Member States that have not made progress recently could be inspired by legislation in 
Member  States  that  are  supportive  of  pupil  mobility  and  that  encourage  it  through 
automatic recognition, including provisions in binational or multinational agreements. 

Recognition would also benefit from Member States continuing their work on increasingly 
developing their curricula in upper secondary education and training on the principles of 
learning outcomes (knowledge, skills and attitudes). 

3.2.2. Support of the European Commission since 2018 

3.2.2.1. Establishing an EU level online information service 

The new Q-Entry database33, launched in 2018 under the Erasmus+ programme, and run 
by  NARIC  centres,  provides  stakeholders  and  the  general  public  with  up-to-date  and 
standardised information on final  school  leaving  qualifications for 55  countries  (27 EU 
Member States + 28 non-EU countries) that allow students  access to higher education in 
their home country. 

3.2.2.2. Support for the recognition of outcomes of learning periods abroad 

  Fostering  mutual  trust  and  peer  learning  between  Member  States  and  between 
institution:  As  a  follow-up  to  a  preparatory  action  initiated  by  the  European 
Parliament,  the  Commission  created  an  expert  network  of  25  members  from  16 
Member  States  who  developed  a  proposal  for  a  European  Framework  for 

32    Expert network on recognition of outcomes of learning periods abroad in general secondary education -  

Member States analysis (2021) | European Education Area (europa.eu) 

33  https://www.q-entry.eu/ 

14 

 
 
                                                 
recognition of outcomes of learning periods abroad34, setting out key principles for 
automatic mutual  recognition  of the learning outcomes of study periods abroad  for 
general  upper  secondary  pupils  based  on  an  analysis  of  the  situation  in  Member 
States35. This suggestion to the Commission will be used as a basis for developing the 
initiative further with Member States. 

  The  Council  Recommendation  on  vocational  education  and  training  (VET)  for 
sustainable  competitiveness,  social  fairness  and  resilience36,  adopted  in  2020, 
reiterated the importance of learning mobility, also by setting a European level target37, 
and recognition of the acquired knowledge, skills and competences. Furthermore, the 
Commission  explored  the  concept  of  the  European  Vocational  Core  Profiles  with  a 
view to facilitate mobility of learners and workers and the transparency and recognition 
training,  Cedefop  developed 
of  qualifications.In  vocational  education  and 
methodologies to support the comparison of qualifications38 and the related education 
and  training  programmes  and  curricula.  Based  on  data  collected  in  2021  from 
Cedefop's ReferNet network for the mobility scoreboard, CEDEFOP issued a briefing 
on the recognition of the learning outcomes acquired abroad by IVET learners39. The 
publication  on  the  ‘Enablers  and  disablers  of  cross-border  long-term  mobility  of 
apprentices’40  also  refers  to  recognition  practices  focusing  on  apprentices  for  a  few 
case studies.  

  The  Erasmus+  programme  has  been  designed  to  increase  pupils’  mobility 
opportunities with the goal of changing the landscape of long-term pupil mobility in 
Europe,  which  until  now  has  mostly  been  driven  by  organisations  outside  of  the 
programme. It will do so by increasing the share of mobility directly managed between 
schools  and  following  the  Erasmus+  quality  standards.  Moreover,  the  learning 
outcomes of participants involved in mobility activities abroad will be recognised by 
their  sending  organisation,  thanks  to  a  new  accreditation  scheme41.  Accredited 
organisations  and  more  particularly  accredited  consortia  should  support 
the 
development of VET mobility with recognition of learning outcomes by the sending 
organisation.  

3.3.  An enabling ecosystem for automatic recognition 

Implementation  of  automatic  recognition  requires  the  creation  of  proper  conditions  for 
trust  and  transparency  between  education  systems.  It  also  requires  sufficient  capacities 
available for national recognition authorities to develop the necessary tools for automatic 
recognition, and to support institutions to implement automatic recognition. The following 

34    Proposal for a European Framework on recognition of outcomes of learning periods abroad in general 

upper secondary education (2021) | European Education Area (europa.eu) 

35    Expert network on recognition of outcomes of learning periods abroad in general secondary education - 

Member States analysis (2021) | European Education Area (europa.eu) 

36  EUR-Lex - 32020H1202(01) - EN - EUR-Lex (europa.eu) 
37  8 % of learners in VET benefit from a learning mobility abroad by 2025 
38  https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/d7fe617d-e541-11ec-a534-

01aa75ed71a1/language-en 

39  Recognising the learning outcomes acquired abroad by IVET learners | CEDEFOP (europa.eu) 
40  Enablers and disablers of cross-border long-term apprentice mobility | CEDEFOP (europa.eu) 
41  https://erasmus-plus.ec.europa.eu/opportunities/organisations/learning-mobility-of-

individuals/erasmus-accreditation 

15 

 
 
                                                 
chapter outlines those elements that are indispensable for both higher education and for 
upper secondary education and training. 

3.3.1. The European Qualifications Framework (EQF) 

the 

The  European  Qualifications  Framework  (EQF)42  facilitates 
transparency, 
comparability  and  portability  of  qualifications  of  different  national  systems.  Through 
referencing National Qualifications Frameworks to the EQF, it is possible to compare all 
types and levels of qualifications from the national systems. Currently, 26 EU Member 
States have referenced their National Qualification Frameworks to the EQF, with ES in the 
process of doing so. Of the 27 Member States, 21 (all except BG, ES, FI, HR, IT and LU) 
indicate EQF levels in national qualifications databases and registers. This helps education 
and training institutions to check if the applicant has the proper level of qualification (for 
example, if the diploma is indeed at Bachelor level for applying to Master studies) in case 
of automatic recognition. 

In addition, 16 Member States share data on qualifications through the Europass platform 
by connecting national qualifications databases or registers43 to that platform. A particular 
challenge relates to recognition between level 5 (e.g. short-cycle tertiary education) and 6 
(Bachelors’  or  equivalent  level).  Level  5  qualifications  can  belong  to  either  higher 
education or post-secondary systems, or even both44. 

Most countries that have referenced to the EQF have done so through a single report that 
includes  the  self-certification  for  the  qualifications  framework  of  the  European  Higher 
Education Area (QF-EHEA). This has been done in all Member States, except CZ, EL, NL 
and SK45. 

3.3.2. The National Academic Recognition Information Centres (NARICs)  

NARICs aim to facilitate the access to accurate information on education systems and 
qualifications  for  EU  and  non-EU  nationals.  Their  competencies  vary  according  to 
national legislation. Some issue only recognition advice/recommendations (EE, IT, IE, SI 
and DE) while others provide legally-binding recognition decisions (BG, BE-Fl, DK, MT, 
HU, SK, LT and RO). They are crucial for checking that a qualification is genuine and at 
the correct level. 

Supported by the Erasmus+ programme, the network of NARICs has published a number 
of  guidelines46  to  facilitate  the  implementation  of  automatic  recognition  by  credential 
evaluators. Since the adoption of the Council Recommendation, two thirds47 of the centres 
have simplified the recognition processes and four (MT, DK, NO, EE) report a decrease in 
recognition requests thanks to the Council Recommendation. 

42  https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32017H0615(01) 
43  https://europa.eu/europass/en/find-courses 
44   “ICF Report on the Implementation of the Council Recommendation on automatic recognition” 2023 
45   Bologna Implementation Report 2020 
46  https://www.enic-naric.net/page-recognition-tools-projects 
47   NARIC survey 2022 

16 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
NARIC competences for higher and upper secondary education 

Higher education 

Secondary education 

Data not available  

Source: European Commission 

The Council Recommendation calls for the role of NARICs’ to be strengthened, by means 
of additional national resources. Extending NARICs to cover upper secondary education 
and  training  (general  education  and  VET)  would  increase  awareness  on  recognition  of 
upper secondary qualifications and support the recognition of outcomes of learning periods 
abroad. 
The  Commission  supports  the  NARIC  network48  by  facilitating  exchanges  of  best 
practices. The Erasmus+ budget for developing their capacity and strengthening the role 
was increased from EUR 1.2 million in 2018 to EUR 3 million in 2022. This led to the 
development  of  supporting  tools49,  guidelines50  and  training  to  those  responsible  for 
evaluating  credentials  (‘credential  evaluators’)  in  higher  education  institutions.  Since 
2020, the Erasmus+ programme has been funding a ‘Technical Support Team’ to help the 
network  fulfil  its  increased  ambitions.  The  increase  of  available  resources  revealed 
significant capacity differences at NARICs, with only 3 centres (IT, NL, LV) coordinating 
more than one Erasmus+ project.  

facilitate 

recognition  processes,  also 

Further  work  on  digital  tools,  such  as  Q-Entry  and  other  qualifications  databases,  may 
further 
the 
interoperability of national databases at European level, and (building on best practice, as 
in the case of the Polish Kwalifikator database) issuing personal Recognition Statements 
on automatic recognition could further remove administrative burden for applicants and 
institutions. 

institutions.  Developing 

for 

48  https://www.enic-naric.net/ 
49  https://www.enic-naric.net/page-recognition-tools-projects 
50  https://www.nuffic.nl/sites/default/files/2020-08/the-triangle-of-automatic-

recognition%20%281%29.pdf 

17 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
By  covering  also  non-European  qualifications,  these  interoperable  databases  could 
facilitate quick, fair and transparent recognition of third-country qualifications (which is 
outside of the scope of the Council Recommendation). Supported and facilitated by the 
Commission,  this  is  in  line  with  the  ambitions  of  the  2022  State  of  the  Union  address, 
which called for progress in this area. 

3.3.3. European digital tools for recognition 

Automatic recognition requires qualifications to be easily verifiable (validity, format, and 
accreditation). The use of European digital tools to issue, store, share and verify credentials 
facilitates the automatic recognition of individual qualifications and outcomes of learning 
periods abroad, and decreases costs and administrative burden for all parties. 

The new Europass platform51, launched in July 2020, facilitates automatic recognition 
by  providing  validated  information  on  qualifications,  qualifications  frameworks,  and 
mobility learning outcomes through tamper-proof Europass documents52. By September 
2022, Europass had 4.3 million users and on average two million people visit the platform 
every month. 

In cooperation with DEQAR53, an accreditation feature, European Digital Credentials for 
learning  (EDC)54  are  being  piloted  in  the  new  Europass  tool.  When  the  Diploma 
Supplement (for higher education) is viewed and shared, the EDC immediately shows the 
related accreditation data. This will make authenticity checks automatic. 

The digitalisation of the Europass Mobility template, currently under development, will 
support  the  recognition  of  the  outcomes  of  learning  mobility  periods  gained  abroad  in 
various levels of education, including traineeships and volunteering. 

4.  SUPPORT FOR FURTHER EFFORT TO IMPLEMENT AUTOMATIC RECOGNITION  

While limited progress has been made since the adoption of the Council Recommendation, 
achieving full implementation by 2025 will require considerable additional efforts. In order 
to boost implementation, the Commission proposes the following actions: 

4.1.  Continue developing trust among national education systems 

  Developing a European Quality Assurance and Recognition System 

Automatic recognition is closely related to building mutual trust among national systems, 
and the development of a true quality culture at higher education institutions. A Quality 
Assurance  and  Recognition  System  would  help  creating  a  closer  link  between  quality 
assurance and recognition at European level, as well as a fit-for-purpose quality assurance 
system  for  deeper  transnational  cooperation,  as  announced  in  the  Communication  on 
Achieving  the  European  Education  Area  by  2025  and  the  European  strategy  for 
universities.  While  the  objective  of  such  a  System  is  much  broader  than  automatic 
recognition only, it will contribute to its realisation. 

51  https://europa.eu/europass/fr 
52       Diploma Supplement, Certificate Supplement for VET and Europass Mobility 
53  https://www.eqar.eu/about/projects/deqar-connect/ 
54  https://europa.eu/europass/en/european-digital-credentials-learning  

18 

 
 
                                                 
The  Commission  will  encourage  Member  States,  NARICs  and  education  and  training 
institutions  to  increase  their  efforts  in  implementing  automatic  recognition  through 
stronger and more agile quality assurance systems.  

While such an initiative will have an EU focus, it has the potential to inspire and further 
boost progress on automatic recognition and quality assurance in  all countries in of the 
European Higher Education Area. 

  Automatic recognition accelerator teams reviews 

The Commission will set-up, with the support of Erasmus+ and NARICs, new automatic 
recognition  accelerator  teams  reviews.  The  objective  will  be  to  accelerate  the 
implementation of the automatic recognition of qualifications and learning periods abroad, 
by sending experts on site to provide the necessary coaching to facilitate recognition in all 
fields. It will build on the NARIC network’s expertise to organise peer support and peer 
counselling  between  countries  that  are  more  advanced  in  automatic  recognition  and 
countries that need further support. 

4.2.  Development of tools for automatic recognition 

  Provision of information on recognition via online platforms 

The Commission will provide more guidance to schools on recognition on the European 
School Education Platform. 

  Standardisation of learning agreements and learning outcomes certificates 

Building on the experience in the higher education sector, the Commission will explore 
potential links between Erasmus+ tools for outcomes of learning periods abroad and the 
Europass Mobility template to provide secure, user-friendly and trusted documentation in 
the school education and VET sectors. 

4.3. 

Support implementation by building capacity in Member States 

  Financial support for automatic recognition 

As called for in the Council Recommendation, Erasmus+ calls dedicated to NARICs will 
continue to provide support to national authorities to implement automatic recognition and 
the  Bologna  transparency  tools.  The  Commission  will  explore  options  to  increase 
participation  by  NARICs  from  each  Member  State.  This  effort  requires  support  from 
Member States to increase capacity building efforts. 

While  the  implementation  of  the  Bologna  transparency  tools  has  improved  since  2018, 
further effort is  needed,  especially on registering national  quality assurance agencies in 
EQAR, issuing the Diploma Supplement (DS) and making full use of the ECTS Users’ 
Guide.  The  Commission  will  provide  a  further  boost  to  implementation  through  the 
Erasmus+ programme European Higher Education Area call. 

Member States may also request technical support to design and implement reforms in the 
area of automatic mutual recognition through the Technical Support Instrument (TSI). 
The TSI is an EU programme that provides tailor-made support in various areas, including 
in the area of education and training, upon request from Member States, on a bilateral or 
multi-country basis. The support is demand-driven and does not require co-financing from 
Member States. 

19 

 
 
 
  Training and information provisions  

There is an increased demand for the amount of training Member States provide to relevant 
staff on automatic recognition. Training should also be provided to schools and teachers 
on assessing the competences of pupils after a learning period abroad, rather than focusing 
on  school  subject  equivalence.  The  Commission  will  support  this  under  the  Erasmus+ 
programme  through  Transnational  Cooperation  Activities  and  Peer-Learning  Activities, 
and provide information online. 

  Facilitate dialogue between Member States 

The Commission services will explore existing Commission policy processes in the school 
education and VET fields to discuss, exchange good practices and establish the opportunity 
for  peer  learning  between  Member  States  to  build  trust  and  transparency  in  upper 
secondary education systems. 

20 

 
Annex I - Overview55 of the implementation of the Council Recommendation 

This table provides a colour guide on the level of implementation per Recommendation 
area, for each Member State, based on best available information. It reflects the ongoing 
process of implementing the Council Recommendation and shows directions and trends. 

Member 
State 

Transpa-
rency 
tools 

Support for 
institutions 
and 
agencies 

Monitoring 
and 
evaluation 

Higher 
education 
qualifications 

Upper 
secondary 
qualifications 

Learning 
periods 
abroad – 
higher 
education 

Learning 
periods 
abroad – 
secondary 
education 

Austria 

Belgium  

Bulgaria  

Croatia  

Cyprus 

Czechia 

Denmark 

Estonia 

Finland 

France 

Germany 

Greece 

Hungary 

Ireland 

Italy 

Latvia 

Lithuania  

Luxembourg 

Malta 

Netherlands 

Poland 

Portugal  

Romania 

Slovakia 

Slovenia  

Spain  

School  VET 

School  VET 

* 

Sweden 
*PT: For periods of 1 school year only 

55 These indications are based on an analysis of the information made available in the context of the study 
“ICF Report on the Implementation of the Council Recommendation on automatic recognition” 2023.  

21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Compliance with European and Bologna transparency tools 

The country fully implements the EU and Bologna transparency tools 

One of the tools is not fully implemented 

Two of the tools are not fully implemented 

Three of the tools are not fully implemented 

Four or more of the tools are not fully implemented 

Measures for capacity building and support for institutions and agencies 

The following measures are applied: 

-  National guidance in place for institutions  
-  NARICs disseminate information and provide training for all institutions 
- 

Applicants receive a decision on system-level recognition through online tools 

Two of the above measures are applied 

One of the measures is applied 

None of the measures is applied 

Monitoring end evaluation 

A  central,  system-level  database  is  in  place  for  collecting  and  disseminating  data  on  recognition  cases, 
which is  regularly updated 

Data  on  recognition  cases  are  systematically  collected  by  a  central  body  made  up  of  higher  education 
institutions upper secondary education institutions 

Data on recognition cases are available from some institutions, but data are not collected and disseminated 
at system level 

No data available 

Automatic recognition of higher education qualifications 

System-level automatic recognition for qualifications issued for all EU Member States with decision-making 
responsibility delegated to a competent system-level body 

System-level automatic recognition for all EU Member States with decision-making responsibility delegated 
to higher education institutions 

System-level automatic recognition for a subset of EU Member States with decision-making at a system-
level body 

System-level  automatic  recognition  for  a  subset  EU  Member  States  with  decision-making  delegated  to 
higher education institutions 

No automatic recognition 

22 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Automatic recognition of upper secondary education qualifications 

Qualifications from upper secondary education (both general education and VET) are automatically and 
fully recognised for nearly all other EU Member States (over 75% of Member States) 
Qualifications are automatically recognised for a majority of other EU Member States (between 50% and 
75%) 
Qualifications are automatically recognised for a minority of other EU Member States (under 50% but more 
than 0%) 
No automatic and full recognition of qualifications (recognition process in place, but not automated)  

Automatic recognition of learning periods abroad – higher education 

Outcomes from a learning period abroad are automatically and fully recognised for all other EU Member 
States, with a full recognition rate of over 90 % reported by Erasmus+ students 
Internal and external quality assurance in place to ensure full implementation of European Credit Transfer 
and Accumulation System 2015 (ECTS) Users’ Guide  principles 

Outcomes from a learning period abroad are recognised, with a full recognition rate of over 85% reported 
by Erasmus+ students 
And/or 
Internal  and  external  quality  assurance  in  place  to  ensure  full  implementation  of  the  2015  ECTS  Users’ 
Guide  but it is not systematically applied (only for some programmes or levels, for example) 

Outcomes from a learning period abroad are recognised, with a full recognition rate over 70% reported by 
Erasmus+ students 
Or 
No quality assurance measures in place to ensure full implementation of the ECTS Users’ Guide 

Outcomes  from a  learning  period  abroad  are not  recognised  automatically  with  a  full  recognition  rate of 
below 70%  reported by Erasmus+ students 
No quality assurance measures in place to ensure full implementation of the ECTS Users’ Guide 

Automatic recognition of learning periods abroad – upper secondary education 

Outcomes from a learning period abroad are automatically and fully recognised from all EU Member 
States and for almost all learning periods of up to 1 year through equivalence  

Outcomes from learning periods abroad are recognised after an official procedure established at system 
level, based on learning outcomes determined to be broadly in line with the sending institutions’ 
curriculum and confirmed in the Transcript of Records 

Most (parts of) learning periods abroad are recognised but some additional exams might be necessary 

Recognition  is  granted  after  an  official  procedure  based  on  curriculum  matching    as  confirmed  in  the 
Transcript of Records 

No  automatic  and  full  recognition,  with  the  exception  of  school-to-school  partnerships  or  clearly  defined 
programmes such as Erasmus+ 

23