Two working groups met to discuss models of cross-border higher education and strategies for future development at the institutional and association levels. The discussion covered a wide range of topics and perspectives on the complex issues surrounding cross-border education. The rapporteurs provided summaries of the working groups, but the Secretary-General noted the discussions were rich and broader than the assigned topics. In concluding, the Secretary-General summarized key impressions including the commitment to academic values among participants, the multifaceted and growing nature of cross-border education, risks associated with some providers, the potential impacts of GATS negotiations, and the role of higher education in addressing global problems and development goals.

1. Eva EGRON-POLAK
Secretary-General, IAU
Chair Closing Plenary
IAU International Conference
Alexandria, Egypt
15-16 November 2005
Two Working Groups met in parallel this morning and again this afternoon. Their task
was to look at the variety of models that Cross Border Higher Education can take. Each
group was also asked to discuss strategies for future development or response to cross
border education, at the institutional level on the one hand and at the level of
associations on the other hand. Both were also asked to consider what services were
needed and associations could develop to serve their members in the most effective way
in this area.
Of course, and I can only judge from the Working Group I joined, the discussion was rich
and often much broader than the specific topic assigned to the Group. I am certain
though, that this was of great benefit and utmost interest to participants. It is essential
for all of us to understand and learn more about our respective knowledge base with
regard to cross border education and take into account our distinct national, regional or
institutional context.
We gave our rapporteurs an impossible task in asking them to report almost immediately
after the end of these rich sessions. I am certain that they have both done an excellent
job, but I also invite all of you to listen carefully and to feel free to comment on their
reports, most particularly if you feel that a major issue has been left out or mis-
interpreted.
The Rapporteur for Group A is: Rasha Saad Sharaf, Assistant, National Tempus
Programme, Egypt.
The Rapporteur for Group B is: Dayanand Dongaonkar, Secretary-General, Association
of Indian Universities.
Thank you for your succinct reports which obviously covered all the important aspects of
the discussions, as no comments have been made.
In concluding this session then, allow me to offer my own very brief summary of
impressions.
During the past intensive and very interesting days here in Alexandria, it became quite
clear that the issues that we have been discussion and examining are important and
complex. We heard many different perspectives and messages. It has been difficult to
reflect on all of this and so I can only share impressions rather than offer an analysis at
IAU International Conference 1

2. this early stage. What I sensed and heard included:
• Values of academic freedom, pursuit of knowledge for the benefit of the largest
number of people and the overall good of society, commitment to cultural
diversity and others, are alive and well among the participants at the Conference.
As a community, we need not feel uncomfortable about defending them, but at
the same time, must not hide behind them as if all that we did as higher
education institutions and associations was perfect because done in their
defense.
• Cross border higher education is multifaceted and already a major aspect of
higher education development worldwide. It is likely to expand and diversify
even more, bringing with it both positive aspects and real risks. Among most
important benefits we learned about innovation, change and increased access.
Among risks, the threat of ever-large number of rogue providers and highly
visible cases of ‘bad practices’ were discussed. There are more subtle threats
and risks as well as there are less visible benefits as well. We need to continue
to observe, comment, and steer policies at all levels accordingly.
• GATS remains a complicating factor whose time is yet to come. As long as the
disagreements over such important sectors as agriculture for example keep the
negotiators busy, we may remain relatively untouched as a sector. Yet
inexorably, education services will inexorably come on the table. At that time,
we, and more importantly our governments, must be ready to come to the
negotiating table with as much knowledge and sensitivity to our issues as
possible.
• There are important global problems and gaps that require continued attention of
the higher education community. Yes, higher education is key to economic
competitiveness. It is also part of the response to the multiple challenges posed
by the Millennium Development Goals. Whether and how cross border higher
education can serve these different needs remains a major challenge for all of
us.
IAU International Conference 2