The document summarizes a policy report commissioned by the European Commission that provides recommendations for increasing access to higher education in the EU. The report was prompted by EU targets to increase the percentage of the population aged 30-34 with a tertiary education degree. It identifies barriers to access such as socioeconomic background and lack of funding. Its recommendations include addressing access and completion in a systemic way, leveraging private funding, and using public funds to encourage diversity in higher education institutions.

1. “A Policy Agenda for Increasing Access
to Higher Education in the EU”
Robyn Bowers
EAD 850
Spring 2014

2. Welcome…
Agenda of presentation:
Summary of policy report
Critical analysis of policy report
Recommendations
References
Please click on the megaphone icon on
each slide!!

3. The document…
A Policy Agenda for Improving Access to Higher Education in
the EU
Analytical report for the European Commission
Prepared by: European Expert Network on Economics and
Education (EENEE)
Audience: European Commission: executive body of the EU,
28 commissioners, including one from each nation-state

4. The problem…
 “Increasing access to Higher Education will be pivotal in
Europe to be able to provide the skills needed for a smart
and sustainable growth in the future” (Veugelers, 2011, p.2).
EUROPE 2020

5. Impetus for policy report…
 Targets for Europe 2020:
 Share of population 30-34 completed tertiary education (32% to
40%)
 Dropouts from school 10%
 Access for underrepresented groups to reduce poverty
 “It will become more important to educate the pool of young
people more intensively, ie to improve access to higher
education for a wider group of people and to ensure a higher
throughput to tertiary graduation” (Veugelers, 2011, p. 2).

6. Major points of report…
 Significant barriers to access: poor pre-training,
disadvantaged socio-economic background, lack of financial
ability, poor job prospects
 Proportion of EU population graduating from higher
education is lower than US or Japan
 Socially disadvantaged students access HE at lower rates
 Higher education leads to better job prospects and higher
earnings
 Funding for HE in Europe relies more heavily on public
sources

7. Recommendations…
Policy should be part
of a systemic agenda
Address both entry
and successful
completion
Fit into primary,
secondary, job, and
lifelong training
Appropriate
leveraging of private
funding
Principles for policymaking
around higher education in
Europe with the goal of
encouraging wider access

8. Recommendations cont’d…
Use of public funding to
encourage access
Incentivize diversity for
HE institutions
Raise awareness of
higher education among
disadvantaged groups
Better indicators and
data for analysis
Principles for policymaking
around higher education in
Europe with the goal of
encouraging wider access

9. Policy analysis…
Neoliberalism:
 “There is thus a global shift towards a neoliberal values
orientation, manifested most clearly in privatization policies
and in policies that assume the validity of market
mechanisms to solve the various problems and crises facing
governments” (Rizvi & Lingard, 2010, p. 72)

10. Policy analysis…
Neoliberalism
Privatization
of
educational
funding
Diversity as
an economic
good
Globalization
pressures

11. Privatization of educational funding
“All this evidence suggests more scope for leveraging private funding
of higher education and in particular for asking students to pay higher
tuition fees, particularly for those degrees where private returns are
substantial” (Veugelers, 2011, p. 15)
Education leads to private
returns, so it should be
paid for by private
individuals
View of education as key in
producing social efficiency and
mobility (Rizvi & Lingard, 2010,
Ch. 4)
World Bank’s commitment to
human capital approach and
private investment in education
(Spring, 2008)
Meaning: Examples:

12. Diversity as an economic good
“As Europe approaches the world technology possibility
frontier…innovation and highly-educated people have become crucial
drivers of its growth potential” (Veugelers, 2011, p. 1)
Widening access to
education is important to
sustain economic
feasibility and growth
“Economics of diversity”
approach (Archer, 2007)
Move from person-centered
education to “strategic
cosmopolitan” education
(Mitchell, 2003)
“Social inclusion” policies (Rizvi
& Lingard, 2010, Ch. 7)
Meaning: Examples:

13. Globalization pressures
“One of the seven flagship initiatives implementing the Europe 2020
strategy, include “Youth on the Move,” an initiative to enhance the
performance of education systems in Europe and to reinforce the
international attractiveness of Europe’s higher education” (Veugelers,
2011, p. 2)
Meeting standard global
expectations of curriculum
and quality in higher
education is important;
European degrees should be
able to transcend national
boundaries
Economic development =
evolution of whiteness
(Leonardo, 2002)
Critique of neoliberal
globalization as reinforcing
global elite and obscuring social
inequality (Rizvi & Lingard,
2010, Ch. 7)
Meaning: Examples:

14. Recommendations…
 1) Acknowledge sociopolitical realities: Situate any efforts for
educational access reform within a comprehensive effort to
address social inequality
 “This is why the first step toward authentic intercultural practice is
undertaking shifts in consciousness that acknowledge
sociopolitical context, raise questions regarding control and
power, and inform, rather than deferring to, shifts in practice”
(Gorski, 2008, p. 522).

15. Recommendations
 2) Provide policy vehicles to ensure the ability of nations and
local communities to tailor policies to the needs of their
environments and situations
 “The combination of scientific knowledge and capitalism within
the context of superiority provided the framework through which
the new lands and people became known to the Europeans and
subsequently became the basis for European control of them”
(Sharp, 2008, p. 4).

16. References
 Archer, L. (2007). Diversity, equality and higher education: a
critical reflection on the ab/uses of equity discourse within
widening participation. Teaching in Higher Education 12(5),
635-653.
 Gorski, P. (2008). Good intentions are not enough: A
decolonizing intercultural education. Intercultural
Education, 19 (6), 515-525.
 Leonardo, Z. (2002). The souls of white folk: Critical
pedagogy, whiteness studies, and globalization discourse.
Race, Ethnicity and Education, 5(1), 29-50.
 Mitchell, K. (2003). Educating the national citizen in
neoliberal times: From the multicultural self to the strategic
cosmopolitan. Transactions of the Institute of British
Geographers, 28(4), 387-403.

17. References
 Rizvi, F. & Lingard, B. (2010). Ch 7: Equity policies in
education and Ch. 8: Mobility and policy dilemmas. In
Globalizing Education Policy (pp. 140-183). New York:
Routledge.
 Rizvi, F. & Lingard, B. (2010). Ch 4: Education policy and
allocation of values. In Globalizing Education Policy (pp. 71-
92). New York: Routledge.
 Sharp, J. (2008). Geographies of postcoloniality. Thousand
Oaks: Sage Publications.
 Spring, J. (2008). Research on the globalization of education.
Review of Educational Research, 78(2), 330–363.