1. ESIB - The National Unions of Students in Europe
Zavelput 20
1000 Brussels
Belgium
T : +32-2-502 23 62
F : +32-2-511 87 06
International Association of Universities (IAU) Conference:
Sharing Quality Higher Education Across Borders: Role of Associations and
Institutions
15. - 16. November 2005, Alexandria
Plenary Session:
Responding to the challenges of cross-border higher education
ESIB Policy Paper on Transnational Education
Christine Scholz
ESIB – The National Unions of Students in Europe
Committee on Commodification of Education
christine@esib.org
First of all I would like to thank the International Association of Universities on behalf of
ESIB – The National Unions of Students in Europe to invite us to your conference and
contribute our student perspective to this debate on cross-border education. Both the
International Association of Universities as well as ESIB have been working on this issue
for quite some time now. You will find in your conference papers the result of our
reflections – ESIBs policy paper on Transnational Education dating back to the year
2002. I have been asked by the organizers of this conference to explain the rationale for
the drafting of this paper, the impacts and implementation on national and international
level as well as ESIBs position regarding these issues. Finally I will also reflect on the
role of students, associations of universities and individual HEI in ensuring the high
quality provision of education across borders.
1. Who is ESIB?
Speaking at a conference of the International Association of Universities you might not
be familiar with ESIB and ESIBs work. So as a brief introduction - ESIB – The National
Unions of Students in Europe was founded in 1982 to promote the educational, economic,
cultural, social and political interests of students in Europe. Through our 44 members
1

2. from 34 countries we currently represents more than 10 million students in Europe.
2. The Rationale for drafting ESIBs Policy on Transnational Education
European higher education has been subjected to various changes within the past decades.
While international cooperation in Higher Education has been existent before, e.g. in
forms of bilateral agreements or development projects, this has changed especially in the
last decade of the 20th century, when an enormous expansion of TNE has taken place.
With the objective to closely monitor and analyze these developments, ESIB has initiated
a project on Transnational Education more than 3 years ago – the rationale being to move
from perception to reflection to policy development to proactive student representation.
And the results being the mentioned policy on Transnational Education as well as a
comprehensive “European Student Handbook on Transnational Education.”
3. Reflections on the background of Transnational Education
One part of our findings was that the way that higher education is viewed by its
stakeholders – be it on national or international level- is changing.
The traditional view of higher education sees it as primarily a public good benefiting the
whole society and as something defined by the higher education institutions themselves,
funded mainly by the public authorities and with an emphasis on internal (institutional or
academic) and political decision making.
The new view of higher education sees it as primarily a private good benefiting the
person acquiring it and also as a means of generating profit, funded by the internal/direct
beneficiaries (i.e. student) and external/indirect beneficiaries (e.g. employers, state) both
looking for particular gains to be achieved through acquiring higher education. It lays
emphasis on market mechanisms and means of facilitating those mechanisms (e.g. trade
agreements). Education has to some extent become a commodity.
The economic role of higher education has increased, as knowledge and innovation have
become the key competitive factors of societies. At the same time, participation in higher
education has expanded to numbers unseen ever before. The notion of higher education
being primarily a means of elite reproduction has changed into mass higher education;
with participation rates over 50 per cent in certain countries, it has changed into universal
higher education. Massification of higher education and new ideology of the “New Public
Management” have lead to increased accountability of the higher education institutions
towards their primary source of funding, the public authorities.
Parallel to the decline of public funding has been the increase in alternative funding
sources, namely funding from different private sources, industry and customers. The
higher education institutions themselves have also strived to broaden their funding base,
for example selling their expertise in the field of education and research, by starting
various programmes for professional development and by establishing special units
dedicated for customised research. The emerging global market for higher education has
also provided the higher education institutions with the possibility of raising revenue by
2

3. selling their education and providing Transnational Education in countries with market
potential for higher education.
4. Transnational Education
As the demand for higher education has in many countries in the world been considerably
larger that the supply by the national higher education system, the world has in the last
ten years witnessed an enormous expansion of Transnational Education. Transnational
Education is provided both by international institutions and other new providers such as
publishing companies or multinational corporations, but also by traditional universities
setting up branches around the globe and exporting their education to other countries.
Arrangements for exporting and importing of educational services have been developed
in several countries and many European and non-European countries have made
investments in marketing their own higher education. In recent years, several virtual
universities have emerged and traditional universities are also beginning to offer degrees
online.
Both benefits as well as dangers can be identified in connection to Transnational
Education.
a) The benefits of Transnational Education
Transnational Education can contribute to increasing variety of higher education and thus
increase students’ possibilities for choice. Increasing competition between providers can
enhance quality and be a wake-up call for national providers to better their quality,
flexibility and responsiveness to the demands of students and societies. Transnational
Education can offer a chance for internationalisation at home for those students that for
some reason don’ t have a possibility for physical mobility. Transnational Education can
also in some cases be the only means of acquiring higher education in transitional or
developing countries, and thus prevent brain drain as people don’ t have to travel abroad
in search of higher education.
b) The downsides of Transnational Education
Transnational provision of higher education can lead to the withdrawal of public
responsibility for education. It can result in problems in quality assurance, equal access
and access to information regarding education. Division between public and private
providers can prove problematic, and Transnational Education can lead to increased
stratification of people and countries. It can jeopardise the national cultural and social
goals and higher education policy-making and impair the national tools for it.
Transnational Education can also lead to increased brain drain. It may subject students to
the position of mere consumers and destroy the sense of community traditionally
associated with higher education.
All different forms of Transnational Education cross national borders and thus pose
challenges and questions to national education systems and international cooperation with
regards to equal access to higher education, quality assurance and accreditation as well as
recognition.
3

4. 5. Challenges connected to access to Higher Education
Since some countries face difficulties to meet the demand for Higher Education by their
own national systems Transnational Education can be understood as a means to meet
such lack in capacity and therefore to broaden access. However such activity at the same
time might also endanger the capacity for building up or developing the own national
system.
Transnational Education programmes are based on different approaches. While some
view it as cooperative development projects, it is for others primarily a means for
generating income. Firstly this has necessarily implications on the level of competition as
opposed to cooperation and capacity building with the existing Institutions in the
respective Higher Education System. Secondly the aim of producing financial revenue to
finance the Higher Education system in the sending country of the Transnational
Education programme leaves in question, whether such programmes actually fostering
access to Higher Education in the respective receiving country.
Furthermore the provision of Higher Education by alternative providers such as
Transnational Education programmes also strengthens trends to reduce public
responsibility for tuition free Higher Education.
6. Challenges connected to quality assurance and recognition
The application of Quality Assurance mechanisms is generally difficult in cross-border
provision of Higher Education. This is especially true for Transnational Education, which
is lies outside any national Higher Education system, such as international institutions,
offshore institutions or corporate universities, as these raise problems of control and
public accountability.
Furthermore the responsibility for the Quality Assurance of such programmes is unclear.
Should the responsibility lie with the sending or the receiving country? Since Quality
Assurance systems work on the basis of social, cultural and educational values specific to
one country, these might not be applicable in the cross-border provision.
In the receiving country however a quality assurance system might not yet be fully
operational, we may ask who then has the responsibility for assuring the quality of
imported Transnational Education. In addition the rigour of Quality Assurance Systems
varies considerably between different states. The fact that education provision is part of a
national recognized framework does not necessarily guarantee its quality.
Transnational Education providers, in addition to not being subject to any external
Quality Assurance regime at present, do not necessarily have any internal Quality
Assurance mechanisms. The lack of functioning Quality Assurance mechanisms makes it
hard to separate good from bad Transnational Education.
The advice and the information about the quality of Transnational Education to the public
are insufficient. This allows for rogue providers to offer their fraudulent qualifications to
ill-informed citizens. This clearly shows the need for institutions, which monitor the
4

5. activities of Transnational Education providers or report bogus institutions to appropriate
national or international authorities. Proper student influence and protection with clear
information and codes of good practice are at present not in place, concerns as to how it
is delivered, organised and recognised need to be addressed. Many internationalisation
policies and practices have been developed without very much concern for quality. This
leaves big gaps between policy and reality. Also, the development of transnational virtual
delivery of HE via distance education and virtual, web-based universities raises new
questions regarding quality assessment.
7. Challenges connected to recognition
The recognition of institutions and programmes for academic and/or professional
purposes is a very complex subject involving conflicting interests at several levels,
between the protection of traditional diplomas and professions and the needs in relation to
mobility and market. This is even pressing with the recognition of TNE qualifications. It
is clear that from a recognition point of view the problems are especially those connected
to imported Transnational Education. But attention also needs to be paid to the exported
Transnational Education. There is also great difference between the problems of
recognition of different forms of Transnational Education, recognition is very often
granted to qualifications earned by programme articulation, franchising or branch
campuses but almost never granted to corporate or virtual universities. The different types
of TNE present different characteristics. Some are acceptable for recognition, some not.
The problems are to distinguish the good Transnational Education from the bad in terms
of quality, which means finding reliable information. The main problem connected to the
recognition of Transnational Education is that no legal/normative instruments exist and
although UNESCO and Council of Europe developed a code for good practice for
Transnational Education provision, it has not really been extensively employed. The
Lisbon Convention on the recognition of academic qualifications, by UNESCO and
Council of Europe, only applies to qualifications issued by recognized education
providers of signatory states. It does not cover all Transnational Education. However
there is nothing to prevent the wider application of the principles of the convention. The
link between recognition and quality assessment must be strengthened. The difficulties
encountered in the recognition of Transnational Education qualifications are due partly to
the lack of specific national regulations but, also to the absence of common guidelines
and approaches to quality control aspects.
8. ESIB view
ESIB believes that Transnational Education can benefit students and countries, provided
that the following preconditions are met.
General principles
1. Higher education should always contribute to the social, cultural and
economic development of a country, despite the method of provision. HE
should contribute to increasing equality between individual, countries and
regions of the world.
5

6. 2. Higher education should not be nationalistic but aim at cultivating open-
minded and tolerant people and societies.
3. Transnational Education providers should be sensitive to the need of the local
community. This responsiveness should be assured through a process of
consultation with the local stakeholders such as the national and local policy
makers and administration, employers and students. Co-operation with local
higher education providers should be favoured. There should be clear goals
stated for higher education provided transnationally.
4. Academic key values such as quality, diversity, equality and academic
freedom should be upheld in all higher education, despite the method of
provision.
Principles regarding regulation
5. Transnational providers should not take advantage of possibly inadequate
local legislation regarding e.g. student and staff rights, safety and quality
regulations and immaterial property rights.
6. Provision of higher education should always be transparent and all
information given should be accurate and up-to-date, in order to facilitate
students, officials and the general public to assess it.
7. Private providers of education should be treated equally whether they be
domestic or foreign. The public providers should be prioritised and protected
from harmful competition.
8. Problems related to quality assurance and recognition need to be addressed
urgently.
Principles related to specific student perspective
9. Any change in the provision of a course (e.g. in relation to twinning
arrangements) should not disadvantage the students.
10. Adequate student services should be guaranteed despite the method of
provision.
9. The role of students’ representatives, Associations of Universities and individual
Higher Education Institutions
To conclude my speech I will shortly reflect on the role of students’ representatives,
Associations of Universities and individual Higher Education Institutions in promoting
the high quality provision of cross-border education. As has been highlighted earlier on
the main challenges hereby lie with the equal access to higher education, quality
assurance and accreditation as well as recognition. Consequently any improvement in the
quality provision of cross-border education must address these issues. Naturally I cannot
6

7. give final answers to this end, but rather ideas for further discussion later on in the
workshops.
The role of the students
- information source for individual students on the issue of cross-border education,
commodification of education and GATS
- gather, analyze and disseminate information regarding cross-border provision of
education among different national and regional student organisations
- develop and represent policy on issues connected to cross-border provision of
Higher Education, i.e. Transnational Education, GATS, commodification of
education
- coordinate joint actions against commodification of education and GATS of
national as well as regional student organisations
- inform local as well as national student organisations about existing mechanisms
to improve the quality provision in cross-border education, share good practise in
the area of quality provision of cross-border education, e.g. IAU strategy for
quality provision in cross-border education
- participate actively in policy development and political processes on national,
regional and international level that aim at improving quality provision of (cross-
border) education, improve transparency, comparability and compatibility as well
as the recognition of qualifications, degrees and Higher Education Systems, e.g.
UNESCO-OECD guidelines, Bologna Process, TUNING project, Lisbon
Recognition Convention
- co-operate with other stakeholders in Higher Education on national, regional and
international level to gather information, communicate about respective policy
and coordinate action on the issue of quality provision of cross-border education
The role of Associations of Universities
- information source for universities on the issue of cross-border education, GATS
and related issues
- provide a platform for discussion of good practise in cross-border education
- develop policy and good practise, e.g IAU strategy for quality provision in cross-
border education
- disseminate information on existing tools and best practise to ensure or improve
the quality provision of cross-border education, e.g. IAU strategy for quality
provision in cross-border education, UNESCO-OECD guidelines, UNESCO code
of good practise in cross-border education
7

8. - co-ordinate and support activity of universities concerning quality initiatives in
the provision of cross-border education, on GATS or other related issues
- actively participate on national, regional and international level in the
development of instruments to improve the quality provision of cross-border
education
The role of individual Higher Education Institutions:
- collect and analyze information on existing instrument, codes of good practises,
mechanisms to improve the quality provision of cross-border education of the
own Higher Education Institution, e.g. IAU strategy for quality provision in cross-
border education, UNESCO-OECD guidelines, UNESCO code of good practise in
cross-border education
- collect and analyze information on processes of internationalisation with an
impact on the provision of cross-border education, e.g. GATS, Bologna Process
- develop policy on internationalisation and cross-border provision of education of
the own Higher Education Institution
- evaluate the existing quality assurance mechanisms in the cross-border provision
of education of the own Higher Education Institution based on the adopted policy
- co-operate with Higher Education Institutions and relevant governmental
authorities in the education sector in the country of origin as well as of provision
of cross-border education of the own Higher Education Institution to improve the
quality of Higher Education provided
- disseminate information on existing instruments to improve quality provision,
processes of internationalisation with impact on the cross-border provision of
Higher Education as well as initiatives taken by the own Higher Education
Institution to improve the quality of cross-border education to all stakeholders
within the own Higher Education Institution as well as in programmes provided
across-borders
With these suggestions I would like to close my presentation and hope they might serve
as a fruitful contribution for the further discussion in the upcoming workshops.
For more information on the work of ESIB in the area of Transnational Education as well
as for ESIBs policy on the issue please refer to our website:
www.esib.org/policies/tne.html
8