1
> Return address P.O.Box 16375 2500 BJ The Hague

Ms. Androulla Vassiliou
Commissioner for Education, Culture, Multilingualism and Youth
European Commission
Wetstraat 200 (BERL.10/110)
1049 BRUSSEL, BELGIË

Date
Subject

Rijnstraat 50
Den Haag
P.O.Box 16375
2500 BJ The Hague
www.rijksoverheid.nl

Reference
HO&S/BL/285101

28 maart 2011
Consultation on Modernisation of Higher Education

Dear Ms. Vassiliou,
In January, you initiated a consultation on the modernisation of higher education
in Europe. This in view of the forthcoming communication on this subject, which is
to be presented in September.
Let me first of all express my appreciation for the opportunity to share my
thoughts with you on an issue that is so important to the EU, its Member States,
and, of course, to students and institutions of higher education.
In the past few months, the strategic EU policy orientations for the next decade
have been defined. The Europe 2020 strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive
growth has been adopted by the European Council and its flagship initiatives have
been presented by the Commission. Education is at the heart of this strategy with
higher education cited as one of its main goals. Earlier, in 2009, the 2020 vision
for the Bologna process was adopted in Leuven. We should now use the
momentum that has been created and put modernisation of higher education high
on our political agendas. At the same time , discussions on the next Financial
Framework will start shortly, with proposals for a new framework expected in
June and those for the various programmes in December.
Below, I will succinctly describe my thoughts on the modernisation of higher
education, using the questions that you have put forward as points of departure.
1.

Today’s key challenges for higher education systems

Over the past few years, several EU Member States have seen a large increase in
the number of students entering higher education and it is widely predicted that,
in the Netherlands, this trend will continue until at least 2020. In June 2010, the
European Council set an EU-wide target which stipulates that at least 40% of the
25-34 year olds should have a tertiary qualification in 2020. This rapid influx of
new students is a positive development since it is likely that tomorrow’s labour
market will have an increased demand for highly-educated people. At the same
time, however, institutions of higher education are confronted with the difficult
task of absorbing these new students while aiming to improve the quality of their
programmes. Tangential to this is the need to keep the teaching profession
attractive in order to maintain a sufficient number of highly-qualified staff against
a

Page 1 of 6

the background of a n ageing population. It is also important to prevent this trend
from having adverse effects on the research component of higher education
institutions, not in the least because this could weaken the knowledge triangle.

Date
15 March 2011
Reference
HO&S/BL/285101

As a result of the recent financial crisis, however, many EU Member States have
been forced to introduce budget cuts, often also on education. This presents the
institutions of higher education with a formidable challenge with regard to their
ambitions, foremost among which is improving the quality of higher education.
Much discussion will be needed to solve this quandary. How, for instance, does it
relate to policies aimed at attracting new target groups, such as Life Long
Learning policy. The further development of private funding opportunities for
institutions of higher education might offer a solution here. As already pointed out
in the 2006 communication on modernising higher education, institutions in
Europe frequently experience difficulties in attracting private funding. Taking into
account our continued commitment to high-quality research and education and
the improvement of our international competitiveness, it is important that all
possibilities for attracting private funding for our institutions of higher education,
both at the national and European levels, are fully used. This, of course, without
affecting academic integrity.
Globalisation is another major challenge, not just for the higher education system,
but for our knowledge economies as a whole. In order to improve our
international competitiveness, we have to improve the connections within the
knowledge triangle. Our education systems should equip graduates with a broad
set of skills with which they can easily adapt to rapidly changing environments. As
such, it is imperative that the higher education system becomes more closely
connected to the labour market and the research arena, and vice ve rsa. How can
our higher education systems adapt to become more closely aligned with our
economic strengths and contribute more towards the great societal challenges
such as those outlined in the Europe 2020 strategy? How do we achieve a better
match between higher education and the competences and skills that are
demanded by the labour market? How do we align national and European
priorities in such a way as to avoid duplication and generate more spillover
effects?
Another challenge is the introduction of tertiary short-cycle education. In The
Netherlands, the Associate Degree fills an important gap in the higher education
system. It is an attractive proposition for new target groups and meets a need of
students, especially those coming from VET, businesses (including SMEs) and civil
society. Challenging questions remain, however, about such issues as the
desirable volume of short-cycle education and its positioning in relation to other
parts of the education system.
In The Netherlands, debate on the future of the Dutch higher education system is
dominated by the 2010 report on this topic by the independent Veerman
committee. The Dutch government has committed itself to implementing the

Page 2 of 6

report’s central recommendations, which call for a strong boost of the quality and
diversity of Dutch higher education.1
2.

Examples of successful European higher education initiatives and reforms

Date
15 March 2011
Reference
HO&S/BL/285101

In recent years, a number of important European initiatives have been
undertaken which have successfully contributed to higher education reform.
Both the U-map project, in which a European classification of higher education
institutions has been developed, and the U-Multirank project, which aims at
developing a multi-dimensional global university ranking, are essential initiatives
for providing more finely tuned transparency instruments.
The European Qualifications Framework which helps to relate the multitude of
national qualifications systems to a single European reference framework will
greatly improve comparability of educational attainment levels for European
students within the EU, and could also have a positive effect on mobility. The
implementation of the reforms in the Bologna Process has similarly helped to
promote mobility and to make the diverse national higher education systems
more closely aligned and more mutually intelligible.
Finally, the open method of coordination has much contributed to European
cooperation and mutual policy learning in this area.
3.

Areas that leave room for improvement

Although substantial progress has been made in recent years, there is still much
room for improvement.
It is of vital importance that continued support is given to the construction of
transparency instruments, as they can be greatly beneficial to institutions in
helping them find their natural partners at a European level. Since instruments
such as U-Map derive much of their potential from the number of countries and
institutions that participate, I believe rolling out U-Map to all Member States
would be desirable. It is also important to continue developing instruments such
as U-Map and U-Multirank and ensure that they can count on broad based
support. For these projects to succeed, they must be able to faithfully map the
diversity of European higher education. As such, it is imperative that we develop
indicators that are substantially different from those which are used in current
rankings. We have to keep working on creating indicators which include other
aspects of the knowledge triangle, such as impact of research and quality of
education. The establishment of a feasible multi-dimensional university ranking is
essential. Transparency, also of performance, will enable institutions to
demonstrate that they are valued for excelling at their specific fields of expertise
without necessarily having to conduct groundbreaking research. I believe this

1

See for the report and the Dutch government’s response: http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/bestanden/documenten-en-

publicaties/kamerstukken/2011/02/07/kabinetsreactie-rapport-commissie-veerman/kabinetsreactie-rapport-commissieveerman.pdf

Page 3 of 6

might enable authorities to make more informed decisions about the provision of
financial incentives.
Multi-dimensional rankings are also instrumental to improving the connections
between actors within the knowledge triangle. Current rankings are primarily
based on research output, such as numbers of peer-reviewed, scientific
publications and fail to include indicators for such important aspects as the quality
of education and dissemination and the application of scientific and technological
knowledge (valorisation). As a result, they do not offer institutions of higher
education any incentives for improving their education levels or their
dissemination activities and cooperation with the business world. Recent American
research has shown that researchers who temporarily leave their universities to
engage in entrepreneurial activities have a structurally lower publication rate
upon their return to research. As a result, then, of the rather limited focus of the
current ranking system, improving the link between the research and business
arenas might have detrimental effects on other aspects of the knowledge triangle.
This, of course, is undesirable.

Date
15 March 2011
Reference
HO&S/BL/285101

Additionally, it is necessary to create more diversity within the system, between
institutions, and with regard to types of educational and research programmes so
that they are more closely aligned with the needs of actors outside the higher
education system. Of course, this should not be at the expense of academic
integrity and does not preclude continued commitment to excellence and groundbreaking research.
4.

Priorities for a new EU strategy on higher education modernisation and
actions to be taken at EU level

What initiatives could be taken at the European level to facilitate the completion
of a well-functioning European Higher Education Area? And how could this be
done in such a way that the principle of subsidiarity and the autonomy of the
institutions of higher education are fully respected? I believe, without being
exhaustive, that European cooperation could be especially useful in the following
areas:
(a) updating and consolidating European initiatives
(b) addressing all issues linked to mobility
(c) recognition of qualifications and credits
(d) improving the functioning of the knowledge triangle
(e) positioning our universities in the world
I will elaborate on these issues below.
A. Update and Consolidate . The past decade has seen fundamental changes in
higher education and the context in which higher education institutions operate.
Notably, the Bologna process with the introduction of the Bachelor/Masterstructure has had a major impact although differences between participating
countries remain in practical interpretation of the reforms and in quality
assurance and accreditation. Other developments are the increasing importance
of international rankings, the proliferation of joint degree programmes and
offshore education, and the further development of transparency tools such as
EQF.

Page 4 of 6

Now that our systems for higher education become more and more interrelated,
the case for closer European cooperation will only become stronger over the next
decade. New European policy initiatives in the area of higher education should
take the present reality into account and seek to consolidate developments and
initiatives already taken.

Date
15 March 2011
Reference
HO&S/BL/285101

B. Mobility. In the context of the globalisation of our economies, all young people
should have the opportunity of a learning experience abroad. At the same time ,
we are facing new challenges linked to mobility, such as designing portability
measures that are both in conformity with EU law and affordable for the home
state. My observation is that there is a lot of good will among Member States to
take mobility a step further, but that additional policies and measures do not
materialise because of fear for either infringement procedures or excessive costs.
I call on your services to think along with Member States on how to practically
approach this dilemma.
Also, we should get a clearer picture of the specific barriers and needs linked to
degree mobility as seen from the perspective of the students. Additionally, we
need to address unbalanced mobility, which creates financial burdens in receiving
states and may cause brain-drain effects in sending states. It would be desirable
to investigate the current situation and to estimate the costs and benefits of
mobility, since good data is currently lacking. It is equally important to keep
improving staff mobility, since internationally experienced staff can improve the
quality of education. Finally, we should emphasize the importance of mobility of
researchers in order to realise the overall strategic objective to make Europe
more attractive for researchers.
C. Recognition. Students rightly want to know if ECTS-credits obtained abroad are
taken into account by their home universities. They also want to know what their
qualifications are worth, especially on the labour market. Therefore recognition
continues to be a key issue where the EU can play a constructive role. For the
access to and exercise of regulated professions, the Directive on Professional
Qualifications is a valuable tool, guaranteeing professionals legal certainty and
rights. The current evaluation of the directive is an important opportunity to seek
further improvement of the procedures for professionals, but also to start a
discussion on how to limit the number of regulated professions (currently more
than 800) to the professions where there is a real concern of general interest.
Finally, academic recognition, for which the Lisbon Recognition Convention
applies, deserves attention of the EU.
D. Knowledge Triangle . In order to stimulate a knowledge triangle of (higher)
education, research and innovation The European Institute for Innovation and
Technology (EIT) has been set up. I am looking forward to the first Strategic
Innovation Agenda which the EIT is currently working on. I believe it is important
that the European modernisation agenda, which will be presented in September,
is closely aligned to the EIT’s strategic agenda. Furthermore, the knowledge
triangle perspective should be one of the guiding principles of the next generation
of programmes, so that (higher) education is not left out whenever research and
innovation are addressed, and vice versa.
E. Position in the World. If our ambition is to create more world-class universities,
an outward -looking perspective is crucial. We should reach out to partners in third
Page 5 of 6

countries and create platforms and partnerships wherever there is a need or a
niche, thus positioning our universities and using the EU’s economies of scale. In
my view, the new institutional framework in the area of EU external policy that
was created by the Treaty of Lisbon could be instrumental to this ambition. It
would be interesting to further explore possibilities for integrating the European
education and research agenda into the EU’s external policies and for facilitating
international cooperation in the areas of education and research through the
extensive network of EU representations all over the world.
5.

Date
15 March 2011
Reference
HO&S/BL/285101

Working methods and programmes

Apart from defining our common agenda, it is important to look into our working
methods. First of all, we have the Open Method of Cooperation (OMC) as used
under the Strategic Framework ET2020. I put a high value on mutual policy
learning and other activities that add to our knowledge base for education policy,
such as EU-wide research, so that we better understand what works and why. We
could make more and better use of the OMC, provided that it is used to address
well-defined needs of Member States and institutions for higher education.
Also, the future EU programme in the area of education and training will be a very
important instrument to further our agenda. I refer to my letter on the future of
the Life Long Learning programme dated 20 December 2010 in which I set out a
number of key points that I believe could shape a new and ambitious programme
in the area of education and training, such as putting more emphasis on
incentives for cooperation at institutional level (e.g. promoting the setting up of
joint degree programmes), and allowing for more flexibility when it comes to
different forms of mobility (including diploma mobility), especially with regard to
stimulating excellence. The current Erasmus Mundus programme already works
along these lines and therefore deserves continuation. Additionally, in order to
reduce administrative burdens, accounting principles and methods for EUsubsidies should be based on a high trust approach and a ‘single information,
single audit’ system.
Finally, we should make full use of the fact that education is at the heart of the
Europe 2020 strategy. In terms of governance, this means that progress towards
our goals is now monitored as part of the “European semester”. One the decisions
the European Council took in this context was to hold regular thematic discussions
on issues relevant to the success of the strategy. To raise the political profile of
the debate on modernisation, I would suggest that -at an appropriate moment- a
thematic discussion on this issue be envisaged in the European Council.
Let me end by expressing the hope that these thoughts may contribute to the
work undertaken by your services in drawing up the communication. Of course, I
would be more than happy to discuss these issues in more depth with you.
Yours sincerely,
State Secretary of Education, Culture and Science

Halbe Zijlstra
Page 6 of 6